Downloads provided by UsageCountsPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.
This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
Blockchain-based access control management for Decentralized Online Social Networks
Copyright policy )EC| HELIOS
Mohsin Ur Rahman; Barbara Guidi; Fabrizio Baiardi;
Mohsin Ur Rahman; Barbara Guidi; Fabrizio Baiardi;
Blockchain-based access control management for Decentralized Online Social Networks
Online Social Networks (OSNs) represent today a big communication channel where users spend a lot of time to share personal data. Unfortunately, the big popularity of OSNs can be compared with their big privacy issues. Indeed, several recent scandals have demonstrated their vulnerability. Decentralized Online Social Networks (DOSNs) have been proposed as an alternative solution to the current centralized OSNs. DOSNs do not have a service provider that acts as central authority and users have more control over their information. Several DOSNs have been proposed during the last years. However, the decentralization of the social services requires efficient distributed solutions for protecting the privacy of users. During the last years the blockchain technology has been applied to Social Networks in order to overcome the privacy issues and to offer a real solution to the privacy issues in a decentralized system. However, in these platforms the blockchain is usually used as a storage, and content is public. In this paper, we propose a manageable and auditable access control framework for DOSNs using blockchain technology for the definition of privacy policies. The resource owner uses the public key of the subject to define auditable access control policies using Access Control List (ACL), while the private key associated with the subject’s Ethereum account is used to decrypt the private data once access permission is validated on the blockchain. We provide an evaluation of our approach by exploiting the Rinkeby Ethereum testnet to deploy the smart contracts. Experimental results clearly show that our proposed ACL-based access control outperforms the Attribute-based access control (ABAC) in terms of gas cost. Indeed, a simple ABAC evaluation function requires 280,000 gas, instead our scheme requires 61,648 gas to evaluate ACL rules.
Italy
Microsoft Academic Graph classification: Blockchain Computer science Privacy policy Vulnerability Access control Social Welfare Permission Encryption Computer security computer.software_genre Decentralization Public-key cryptography Vulnerability (computing) business.industry Service provider business Access control list computer
Computer Networks and Communications, Theoretical Computer Science, Access control list, Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, Privacy issue, Access control list; Blockchain; Decentralized Online Social Networks; Privacy issue, Decentralized Online Social Networks, Hardware and Architecture, Software
Computer Networks and Communications, Theoretical Computer Science, Access control list, Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, Privacy issue, Access control list; Blockchain; Decentralized Online Social Networks; Privacy issue, Decentralized Online Social Networks, Hardware and Architecture, Software
Microsoft Academic Graph classification: Blockchain Computer science Privacy policy Vulnerability Access control Social Welfare Permission Encryption Computer security computer.software_genre Decentralization Public-key cryptography Vulnerability (computing) business.industry Service provider business Access control list computer
3414
[1] B. Guidi, M. Conti, A. Passarella, L. Ricci, Managing social contents in decentralized online social networks: A survey, Online Social Networks and Media 7 (2018) 12{29.
[2] B. Guidi, A. Michienzi, K. Koidl, K. Kapanova, A multilayer social overlay for new generation dosns, in: Proceedings of the 5th EAI International Conference on Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good, 2019, pp. 114{119.
[3] A. Datta, S. Buchegger, L.-H. Vu, T. Strufe, K. Rzadca, Decentralized online social networks, in: Handbook of Social Network Technologies and Applications, Springer, 2010, pp. 349{378.
[4] A. De Salve, R. Di Pietro, P. Mori, L. Ricci, A logical key hierarchy based approach to preserve content privacy in decentralized online social networks, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing.
[5] A. Tootoonchian, S. Saroiu, Y. Ganjali, A. Wolman, Lockr: better privacy for social networks, in: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Emerging networking experiments and technologies, ACM, 2009, pp. 169{ 180.
[6] K. P. Puttaswamy, B. Y. Zhao, Preserving privacy in location-based mobile social applications, in: Proceedings of the Eleventh Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems & Applications, ACM, 2010, pp. 1{6.
[7] R. Baden, A. Bender, N. Spring, B. Bhattacharjee, D. Starin, Persona: an online social network with user-de ned privacy, in: ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 39, ACM, 2009, pp. 135{146.
[8] B. Guidi, T. Amft, A. De Salve, K. Gra , L. Ricci, Didusonet: A p2p architecture for distributed dunbar-based social networks, Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications 9 (6) (2016) 1177{1194.
[9] R. Narendula, A. Papaioannou, K. Aberer, A Decentralized Online Social Network with E cient User-Driven Replication, in: IEEE SocialCom, 2012.
[10] M. Conti, A. De Salve, B. Guidi, F. Pitto, L. Ricci, Trusted dynamic storage for dunbar-based p2p online social networks, in: OTM Confederated International Conferences" On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems", Springer, 2014, pp. 400{417.
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).28 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Top 10% impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% views 101 downloads 176 citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).28 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Top 10% impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% - 101views176downloads
citations
Citations provided by BIP!
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
Citations provided by BIP!popularityPopularity provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
Popularity provided by BIP!influenceInfluence provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
Influence provided by BIP!impulseImpulse provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
Impulse provided by BIP!viewsViews provided by UsageCounts
Views provided by UsageCountsdownloadsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts 28
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
101
176
Online Social Networks (OSNs) represent today a big communication channel where users spend a lot of time to share personal data. Unfortunately, the big popularity of OSNs can be compared with their big privacy issues. Indeed, several recent scandals have demonstrated their vulnerability. Decentralized Online Social Networks (DOSNs) have been proposed as an alternative solution to the current centralized OSNs. DOSNs do not have a service provider that acts as central authority and users have more control over their information. Several DOSNs have been proposed during the last years. However, the decentralization of the social services requires efficient distributed solutions for protecting the privacy of users. During the last years the blockchain technology has been applied to Social Networks in order to overcome the privacy issues and to offer a real solution to the privacy issues in a decentralized system. However, in these platforms the blockchain is usually used as a storage, and content is public. In this paper, we propose a manageable and auditable access control framework for DOSNs using blockchain technology for the definition of privacy policies. The resource owner uses the public key of the subject to define auditable access control policies using Access Control List (ACL), while the private key associated with the subject’s Ethereum account is used to decrypt the private data once access permission is validated on the blockchain. We provide an evaluation of our approach by exploiting the Rinkeby Ethereum testnet to deploy the smart contracts. Experimental results clearly show that our proposed ACL-based access control outperforms the Attribute-based access control (ABAC) in terms of gas cost. Indeed, a simple ABAC evaluation function requires 280,000 gas, instead our scheme requires 61,648 gas to evaluate ACL rules.
Thank you for your feedback.
Before sending us your options, would you like to leave us your e-mail to notify you about the reporting status?