skip to main content
research-article

Intelligent Mediator-based Enhanced Smart Contract for Privacy Protection

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 January 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

With the development of ICT technology, users are actively participated in content creation and sharing. Service providers have provided more diverse and extensive information services. With the recent evolution to a customized service, the demand for the use of personal information is increasing. However, it affects the efficiency and convenience of service provision, as social problems and security threats such as personal information leakage, human trafficking, and misuse increase. In this article, we proposed an intelligent mediator-based enhanced smart contract for privacy protection. The proposed approach performs the tasks, which are mediation transactions, authorization, and transaction record management, with blockchain-based personal information management. Then it is possible to prevent misuse of personal information and to support rational decision-making on the transparency of information and the use of personal information by autonomously performing personal information management.

References

  1. J. Barcelo. 2014. User privacy in the public bitcoin blockchain. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.upf.edu/∼jbarcelo/papers/20140704_User_Privacy_in_the_Public_Bitcoin_Blockchain/paper.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. I. Bilogrevic, K. Huguenin, B. Agir, M. Jadliwala, M. Gazaki, and J. P. Hubaux. 2016. A machine learning based approach to privacy-aware information-sharing in mobile social networks. Pervas. Mob. Comput. 25, 125--142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. V. Buterin. 2014. A next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform. Retrieved from https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. C. Cadwalladr and E. Graham-Harrison. 2018. Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach. The Guardian 17, 22. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. De Angelis. 2018. Assessing security and performances of consensus algorithms for permissioned blockchains. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1805.03490. (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. I. Eyal, A. E. Gencer, E. G. Sirer, and R. Van Renesse. 2016. Bitcoin-NG: A scalable blockchain protocol. In Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’16). 45--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. A. Guadamuz and C. Marsden. 2015. Blockchains and bitcoin: Regulatory responses to cryptocurrencies. First Mond. 20 (12-7). Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2704852.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. V. C. Hu, D. R. Kuhn, D. F. Ferraiolo, and J. Voas. 2015. Attribute-based access control. Computer 48, 2 (2015), 85--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. N. Kaaniche and M. Laurent. 2017. A blockchain-based data usage auditing architecture with enhanced privacy and availability. In Proceedings of the IEEE 16th International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications (NCA’17). 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Kim and S. O. Park. 2013. Group affinity based social trust model for an intelligent movie recommender system. Multim. Tools Applic. 64, 2 (2013), 505--516.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. M. Kim, J. Seo, S. Noh, and S. Han. 2012. Identity management-based social trust model for mediating information sharing and privacy enhancement. Secur. Commun. Netw. 5, 8 (2012), 887--897.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Korea Law Information Center. 2018. degree of the Personal Information Protection Act/(20190101,29421,20181224)/ Retrieved from https://www.law.go.kr/LSW/eng/engLsSc.do?menuId=28section=lawNm8query=degree+of+the+Personal+Information+Protection8x=208y=27#liBgcolor17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Kosba, A. Miller, E. Shi, Z. Wen, and C. Papamanthou. 2016. Hawk: The blockchain model of cryptography and privacy-preserving smart contracts. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP’16). 839--858.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. X. Liang, S. Shetty, D. Tosh, C. Kamhoua, K. Kwiat, and L. Njilla. 2017. Provchain: A blockchain-based data provenance architecture in cloud environment with enhanced privacy and availability. In Proceedings of the 17th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing. 468--477. IEEE Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. P. Maymounkov and D. Mazieres. 2002. Kademlia: A peer-to-peer information system based on the XOR metric. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Peer-to-peer Systems, Vol. 2429. 53--65. Springer, Berlin. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45748-8_5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. R. Mercer. 2016. Privacy on the blockchain: Unique ring signatures. ArXiv Preprint Arxiv:1612.01188. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ministry of the Interior and Safety. 2018. 2018 Privacy Protection Survey Report (Report No.: 11-1312000-000035-10), Ministry of the Interior and Safety, 115--134. https://www.korea.kr/archive/expDocView.do?docId=39045Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S. Nakamoto. 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Retrieved from https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. S. Nathan, C. Govindarajan, A. Saraf, M. Sethi, and P. Jayachandran. 2019. Blockchain meets database: Design and implementation of a blockchain relational database. Proc. VLDB Endow. 12, 11 (1539--1552).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. A. Ouaddah, A. Abou Elkalam, and A. Ait Ouahman. 2016. FairAccess: A new blockchain-based access control framework for the internet of things. Secur. Commun. Netw. 9, 18 (2016), 5943--5964.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. A. Passant, P. Laublet, J. G. Breslin, and S. Decker. 2009. A URI is worth a thousand tags: From tagging to linked data with MOAT. Int. J. Semant. Web Inf. Syst. 5, 3 (2009), 71--94. DOI:10.4018/jswis.2009081904Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. J. Poon and V. Buterin. 2018. Plasma: Scalable autonomous smart contracts. Retrieved from https://plasma.io, 72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. J. Poon and T. Dryja. 2016. The bitcoin lightning network: Scalable off-chain instant payments. Retrieved from https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. K. Rantos, G. Drosatos, K. Demertzis, C. Ilioudis, and A. Papanikolaou. 2018. Blockchain-based consents management for personal data processing in the IoT ecosystem. In Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on e-Business and Telecommunications. 738--743. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5220/0006911007380743Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. Teutsch and C. Reitwießner. 2019. A scalable verification solution for blockchains. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1908.04756. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. G. Zyskind and O. Nathan. 2015. Decentralizing privacy: Using blockchain to protect personal data. In Proceedings of the IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops. 180--184.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Intelligent Mediator-based Enhanced Smart Contract for Privacy Protection

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Internet Technology
      ACM Transactions on Internet Technology  Volume 21, Issue 1
      Visions Paper, Regular Papers, SI: Blockchain in E-Commerce, and SI: Human-Centered Security, Privacy, and Trust in the Internet of Things
      February 2021
      534 pages
      ISSN:1533-5399
      EISSN:1557-6051
      DOI:10.1145/3441681
      • Editor:
      • Ling Liu
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 January 2021
      • Accepted: 1 May 2020
      • Revised: 1 April 2020
      • Received: 1 December 2019
      Published in toit Volume 21, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!