Enhanced Trusted Third Party for Cyber Security in Multi Cloud Storage
Cloud Computing offers an business model and it is tempting for companies to delegate their IT services, as well as data, to the Cloud. But in Cloud environment, lacking of cyber security users may suffer a serious data loss without any compensation for they have lost all their control on their data. Cyber security is the body of technologies and it is designed to protect networks, computers, programs and data from attack, damage or unauthorized access. Security audit is an important solution enabling trace back and analysis of any activities including data accesses, security breaches, application activities, and so on. Provable data possession (PDP) is an audit technique for ensuring the security of data in storage outsourcing. However, this existing audit schemes have focused on static data and the fact that users no longer have physical possession of the possibly large size of outsourced data makes the data integrity protection is very challenging task. For the cyber security we present a novel way implementation of a Trust Enhanced Third Party Auditor (TETPA), a trusted and easy-to- use auditor for Cloud environment. TETPA enables the Cloud Service Providers’ accountability, and protects the Cloud users’ benefits. Moreover our audit service is using for dynamic integrity verification in multi cloud storage. This scheme is based on the techniques, fragment structure, random sampling and index-hash table, Zero-Knowledge supporting provable updates to outsourced data and timely anomaly detection.
KeywordsStorage Security Provable Data Possession Audit Service Zero- Knowledge
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Ateniese, G., Burns, R.C., Curtmola, R., Herring, J., Kissner, L., Peterson, Z.N.J., Song, D.X.: Provable data possession at untrusted stores. In: Ning, P., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Syverson, P.F. (eds.) ACM, pp. 598–609. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Juels, A., K. Jr., B.S.: Pors: proofs of retrievability for large files. In: Ning, P., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Syverson, P.F. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 584–597. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
- 4.Ateniese, G., Pietro, R.D., Mancini, L.V., Tsudik, G.: Scalable and efficient provable data possession. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Netowrks, SecureComm, pp. 1–10 (2008)Google Scholar
- 5.Erway, C.C., Kupc¸, A., Papamanthou, C., Tamassia, R.: Dynamic provable data possession. In: Al-Shaer, E., Jha, S., Keromytis, A.D. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 213–222. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
- 8.Zhu, Y., Wang, H., Hu, Z., Ahn, G.J., Hu, H., Yau, S.S.: Dynamic audit services for integrity verification of outsourced storages in clouds. In: Chu, W.C., Wong, W.E., Palakal, M.J., Hung, C.C. (eds.) SAC, pp. 1550–1557. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
- 9.Fortnow, L., Rompel, J., Sipser, M.: On the power of multiprover interactive protocols. Theoretical Computer Science, 156–161 (1988)Google Scholar
- 10.Zhu, Y., Hu, H., Ahn, G.J., Han, Y., Chen, S.: Collaborative integrity verification in hybrid clouds. In: IEEE Conference on the 7th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing, CollaborateCom, Orlando, Florida, USA, October 15-18, pp. 197–206. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar