Peer Reviewed Title: Store, Forget, and Check: Using Algebraic Signatures to Check Remotely Administered Storage

By T. Schwarz, Ethan L. Miller. 2006

400 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/311984dcbfc558a68f766dcd13aae28db3bcab96

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. Giuseppe Ateniese
2. Kui Ren
3. Qian Wang
4. Kan Yang
5. Hovav Shacham
6. Kevin D. Bowers
7. Brent Waters
8. Ari Juels

Citations in the corpus

• MR-PDP: Multiple-Replica Provable Data Possession (2008, background): “Recently, there has been much interest in having clients (that do not have a copy of the data) check that servers have a copy of the data [4, 17, 23, 24].”
• Privacy-Preserving Public Auditing for Secure Cloud Storage (2013, background): “Schwarz and Miller [31] propose the first study of checking the integrity of the remotely stored data across multiple distributed servers.”
• Ensuring data storage security in Cloud Computing (2009, methodology): “The token computation function we are considering belongs to a family of universal hash function [11], chosen to preserve the homomorphic properties, which can be perfectly integrated with the verification of erasure-coded data [8] [ 12].”
• Privacy-Preserving Audit and Extraction of Digital Contents (2008, background): “Some efficient, challenge-response protocols have been proposed for auditing [1, 2, 11, 22, 23] storage services, but they all have the potential to reveal some information to the auditor.”
• An Efficient and Secure Dynamic Auditing Protocol for Data Storage in Cloud Computing (2013, background): “We further extend our auditing protocol to support batch auditing for both multiple owners and multiple clouds, without using any trusted organizer.”
• DepSky: dependable and secure storage in a cloud-of-clouds (2011, background): “HAIL and SafeStore are examples of replicated storage systems that use auditing protocols, usually based on algebraic signatures and erasure codes [Schwarz and Miller 2006], to verify that the storage server (or cloud) still has the data and that it is not corrupted.”
• Enabling Public Verifiability and Data Dynamics for Storage Security in Cloud Computing (2009, background): “Unfortunately, the state-of-the-art in the context of remote data storage mainly focus on static data files and the importance of this dynamic data updates has received limited attention in the data possession applications so far [1–4, 6, 9, 11, 12].”
• Scalable and efficient provable data possession (2008, methodology): “Erasure codes in the context of checking storage integrity were used, for example, in OceanStore [23], PASIS [19], and by Schwarz and Miller [28] (see also references therein).”
• Provable data possession at untrusted stores (2007, methodology): “[20] [20]-Wagner [17, 19] [41] [40] S-PDP E-PDP (MHT-SC) (B-PDP)”
• Compact Proofs of Retrievability (2008, background): “: ASIACRYPT 2008, LNCS 5350, pp. 90–107, 2008. c© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2008 available and ready for retrieval if needed: Deswarte, Quisquater, and Säıdane [8], Filho and Barreto [9], and Schwarz and Miller [15].”
• Dynamic provable data possession (2009, background): “They review previous wo rk on protocols fitting their model, but find these approaches lacking: either they require expensiv e ser er computation or communication over the entire file [9, 23], linear storage for the client [30], or do not provide security guarantees for data possession [29].”
• HAIL: a high-availability and integrity layer for cloud storage (2009, methodology): “Our key insight (inspired by ideas of Schwartz and Miller [31])”
• Auditing to Keep Online Storage Services Honest (2007, background): “Miller and Schwarz [ 13 ] describe an ef cient method for checking online storage, but it cannot provide full coverage and privacy simultaneously.”