Skip to main content
Log in

Proof of violation for response time auditing in cloud systems

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we propose to employ the concept of proof of violation (POV) for the response time auditing in the cloud. A POV scheme enables a user or a service provider to produce a precise proof of either the occurrence of the violation of properties or the innocence of the service provider. POV schemes are solutions for obtaining mutual nonrepudiation between users and the service provider in the cloud. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first scheme that can perform response time auditing according to cryptographic evidences without the need of a delivery agent. Experimental results are presented that demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed scheme. Service providers can use the proposed scheme to provide a mutual nonrepudiation guarantee for response time in their service-level agreements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. \(x \cong y\) means x is approximately equal to y.

  2. The transmission time, is the amount of time from the beginning until the end of a message transmission which can be obtained as: message transmission time = latency + length/data transfer rate [12].

  3. The clocks of two computers can be synchronized such as using network time protocol [13]. Generally speaking, it is global aware that synchronized clocks of two computers are close.

References

  1. Myerson JM Best practices to develop SLAs for cloud computing. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/cloud/library/cl-slastandards/cl-slastandards-pdf.pdf

  2. Alhamad M, Dillon T, Wu C, Chang E (2010) Response time for cloud computing providers. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on information integration and web-based applications and services, pp 603–606

  3. Wang Q, Kanemasa Y, Li J, Jayasinghe D, Kawaba M, Pu C (2012) Response time reliability in cloud environments: an empirical study of n-tier applications at high resource utilization. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 31st symposium on reliable distributed systems (SRDS), pp 378–383

  4. Amazon S3 Service Level Agreement. http://aws.amazon.com/s3-sla/

  5. Gunestas M, Wijesekera D, Elkhodary A (2009) An evidence generation model for web services. In: IEEE international conference on system of systems engineering (SoSE)

  6. Gunestas M, Mehmet M, Wijesekera D, Singhal A (2011) Forensic web services framework. IT Prof 13(3):31–37. doi:10.1109/MITP.2011.41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ruebsamen T, Reich C (2013) Supporting cloud accountability by collecting evidence using audit agents. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on cloud computing technology and science

  8. Kremer S, Markowitch O, Zhou J (2002) An intensive survey of fair non-repudiation protocols. Comput Commun 25:1601–1621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hwang G-H, Huang W-S, Peng J-Z (2014) Real-time proof of violation for cloud storage. In: The 6th IEEE international conference on cloud computing technology and science (IEEE CloudCom 2014), December 27–29, Singapore

  10. Haeberlen A (2010) A case for the accountable cloud. ACM SIGOPS Op Syst Rev 44(2):52–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hwang G-H, Peng J-Z, Huang W-S (2013) A mutual nonrepudiation protocol for cloud storage with interchangeable accesses of a single account from multiple devices. In: The 12th IEEE international conference on trust, security and privacy in computing and communications (IEEE TrustCom-2013), Melbourne, Australia, 16–18 July

  12. Coulouris G, Dollimore J, Kindberg T (2000) Distributed systems: concepts and design, 3rd edn. Addison Wesley, Boston

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Mills DL (2011) Computer network time synchronization: the network time protocol on earth and in space, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (ISBN 978-1-4398-1463-5)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Yumerefendi AR, Chase JS (2007) Strong accountability for network storage. ACM Trans Storage 11:1–11:33

  15. Yumerefendi AR, Chase JS (2004) Trust but verify: accountability for network services. In: Proceedings of the 11th workshop on ACM SIGOPS European workshop

  16. Yumerefendi AR, Chase JS (2005) The role of accountability in dependable distributed systems. In: Proceedings of the first conference on hot topics in system dependability

  17. Popa RA, Lorch JR (2011) Enabling security in cloud storage SLAs with CloudProof. In: USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX)

  18. Hwang G-H, Peng J-Z, Huang W-S (2013) A mutual nonrepudiation protocol for cloud storage with interchangeable accesses of a single account from multiple devices. In: The 12th IEEE international conference on trust, security and privacy in computing and communications (IEEE TrustCom-2013), Melbourne, Australia, 16–18 July

  19. Hwang G-H, Huang W-S, Peng J-Z, Lin Y-W Fulfilling mutual nonrepudiation for cloud storage. To appear in Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience

  20. Hwang G-H, Huang W-S, Peng J-Z (2014) Real-time proof of violation for cloud storage. In: The 2014 6th IEEE international conference on cloud computing technology and science (IEEE CloudCom 2014), December 27–29, 2014, Singapore

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gwan-Hwan Hwang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hwang, GH., Yuan, YL. Proof of violation for response time auditing in cloud systems. J Supercomput 75, 65–76 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-015-1555-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-015-1555-0

Keywords

Navigation