Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2008/346
Remote Integrity Check with Dishonest Storage Server
Ee-Chien Chang and Jia Xu
Abstract: We are interested in this problem: a verifier, with a small and
reliable storage, wants to periodically check whether a remote
server is keeping a large file $\mathbf{x}$. A dishonest server,
by adapting the challenges and responses, tries to discard partial
information of $\mathbf{x}$ and yet evades detection. Besides the
security requirements, there are considerations on communication,
storage size and computation time. Juels et al. \cite{Pors} gave
a security model for {\em Proof of Retrievability} ({\POR})
system. The model imposes a requirement that the original ${\bf
x}$ can be recovered from multiple challenges-responses. Such
requirement is not necessary in our problem. Hence, we propose an
alternative security model for {\em Remote Integrity Check}
({\RIC}). We study a few schemes and analyze their efficiency and
security. In particular, we prove the security of a proposed
scheme {\simplePIR}. This scheme can be deployed as a {\POR}
system and it also serves as an example of an effective {\POR}
system whose ``extraction'' is not verifiable. We also propose a
combination of the RSA-based scheme by Filho et al. \cite{DDPs}
and the ECC-based authenticator by Naor et al.
\cite{complex_memcheck}, which achieves good asymptotic
performance. This scheme is not a {\POR} system and seems to be a
secure {\RIC}. In-so-far, all schemes that have been proven
secure can also be adopted as {\POR} systems. This brings out the
question of whether there are fundamental differences between the
two models. To highlight the differences, we introduce a notion,
{\em trap-door compression}, that captures a property on
compressibility.
Category / Keywords: cryptographic protocols / Integrity Check, Peer-2-peer applications
Date: received 6 Aug 2008, last revised 2 Nov 2008
Contact author: xujia at comp nus edu sg
Available formats: PDF | BibTeX Citation
Note: Some minor changes.
Version: 20081103:042651 (All versions of this report)
Discussion forum: Show discussion | Start new discussion
[ Cryptology ePrint archive ]