A privacy preserved and credible network protocol

Abstract The identities of packet senders and receivers are treated as important privacy information in communication networks. Any packet can be attributed to its sender for evaluating its credibility. Existing studies mainly rely on third-party agents that contain the packet sender’s identity to ensure the sender’s privacy preservation and credibility. In this case, packet senders run the risk that their privacy might be leaked by the agent. To this end, this paper proposes a Privacy Preserved and Credible Network Protocol (PCNP), which authorizes the agent to hide the identities of senders and receivers, while guaranteeing the credibility of a packet. The feasibility of the PCNP deployment is analyzed, and its performance is evaluated through extensive experiments.

[1]  Fakhri Alam Khan,et al.  Privacy by Architecture Pseudonym Framework for Delay Tolerant Network , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[2]  Feng Bao,et al.  Evolving privacy: From sensors to the Internet of Things , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[3]  David Wetherall,et al.  Enlisting ISPs to Improve Online Privacy: IP Address Mixing by Default , 2009, Privacy Enhancing Technologies.

[4]  Paul F. Syverson,et al.  Anonymous connections and onion routing , 1998, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[5]  Victor I. Chang,et al.  Privacy-preserving fusion of IoT and big data for e-health , 2018, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[6]  Laurence T. Yang,et al.  Role-Dependent Privacy Preservation for Secure V2G Networks in the Smart Grid , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[7]  Jiankun Hu,et al.  Preserving transaction privacy in bitcoin , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[8]  Adrian Perrig,et al.  Accountability in future internet architectures , 2014, Commun. ACM.

[9]  Theodore Tryfonas,et al.  The Internet of Things: a security point of view , 2016, Internet Res..

[10]  Arun Venkataramani,et al.  MobilityFirst: a robust and trustworthy mobility-centric architecture for the future internet , 2012, MOCO.

[11]  Paul E. Fischer,et al.  Imperfect Information and Credible Communication , 2001 .

[12]  Raimo Kantola,et al.  Privacy-preserving trust management for unwanted traffic control , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[13]  Stefan Savage,et al.  Privacy-preserving network forensics , 2011, Commun. ACM.

[14]  Jiming Chen,et al.  RFID and Sensor Networks: Architectures, Protocols, Security, and Integrations , 2009 .

[15]  Stephen T. Kent,et al.  Secure Border Gateway Protocol (S-BGP) , 2000, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[16]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Accountable internet protocol (aip) , 2008, SIGCOMM '08.

[17]  Laurence T. Yang,et al.  Aggregated-Proofs Based Privacy-Preserving Authentication for V2G Networks in the Smart Grid , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid.

[18]  Peter Steenkiste,et al.  Balancing accountability and privacy in the network , 2015, SIGCOMM.

[19]  Yulei Wu,et al.  An Architecture for Accountable Anonymous Access in the Internet-of-Things Network , 2018, IEEE Access.

[20]  David Chaum,et al.  Untraceable electronic mail, return addresses, and digital pseudonyms , 1981, CACM.

[21]  Pekka Nikander,et al.  Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Architecture , 2006, RFC.

[22]  Shancang Li,et al.  Distributed Consensus Algorithm for Events Detection in Cyber-Physical Systems , 2019, IEEE Internet of Things Journal.

[23]  Shancang Li,et al.  Dynamic Security Risk Evaluation via Hybrid Bayesian Risk Graph in Cyber-Physical Social Systems , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems.

[24]  Jiankun Hu,et al.  Preface: Security and privacy in big data clouds , 2017, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[25]  Michael K. Reiter,et al.  Crowds: anonymity for Web transactions , 1998, TSEC.