skip to main content
10.1145/3468784.3469853acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiaitConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Privacy Preservation Model for RFID Data-Collections is Highly Secure and More Efficient than LKC-Privacy

Published:20 July 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

RFID is a smart label technology that is used in several real-life applications such as inventory management, asset tracking, personnel tracking, controlling access to restricted areas, ID badging, supply chain management, counterfeit prevention (e.g., in the pharmaceutical industry), and smart farming. Generally, the data collection of RFIDs consists of the users’ visited locations and their visiting time, so called as trajectory datasets. Aside from applications, trajectory datasets can also be released for public use. For this reason, they could lead to being privacy violation issues. To address these issues in trajectory datasets, LKC-Privacy is proposed. Unfortunately, in this work, we demonstrate that LKC-Privacy still has a serious vulnerability that must be improved. To rid the demonstrated vulnerability of LKC-Privacy, a privacy preservation model is proposed in this work. Furthermore, the proposed mode is evaluated by extensive experiments. From the experimental results, they indicate that the proposed model is highly secure and more efficient than LKC-Privacy.

References

  1. Benjamin C. M. Fung, Ming Cao, Bipin C. Desai, and Heng Xu. 2009. Privacy Protection for RFID Data. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Honolulu, Hawaii) (SAC ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1528–1535. https://doi.org/10.1145/1529282.1529626Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Juels. 2006. RFID security and privacy: a research survey. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 24, 2(2006), 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2005.861395Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Jae-Gil Lee, Jiawei Han, and Kyu-Young Whang. 2007. Trajectory Clustering: A Partition-and-Group Framework. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (Beijing, China) (SIGMOD ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 593–604. https://doi.org/10.1145/1247480.1247546Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. A. Machanavajjhala, J. Gehrke, D. Kifer, and M. Venkitasubramaniam. 2006. L-diversity: privacy beyond k-anonymity. In 22nd International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE’06). 24–24. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.2006.1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Noman Mohammed, Benjamin C.M. Fung, and Mourad Debbabi. 2010. Preserving Privacy and Utility in RFID Data Publishing. Technical Report. https://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/6850/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Noppamas Riyana, Surapon Riyana, Srikul Nanthachumphu, Suphannika Sittisung, and Dussadee Duangban. 2020. Privacy Violation Issues in Re-publication of Modification Datasets. In International Conference on Intelligent Computing & Optimization. Springer, 938–953.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Surapon Riyana. 2021. (lp1, ..., lpn)-Privacy: privacy preservation models for numerical quasi-identifiers and multiple sensitive attributes. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing (jan 2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02715-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Surapon Riyana, Nattapon Harnsamut, Uratcha Sadjapong, Srikul Nanthachumphu, and Noppamas Riyana. 2021. Privacy Preservation for Continuous Decremental Data Publishing. In Image Processing and Capsule Networks, Joy Iong-Zong Chen, João Manuel R. S. Tavares, Subarna Shakya, and Abdullah M. Iliyasu (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 233–243.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. S. Riyana, N. Harnsamut, T. Soontornphand, and J. Natwichai. 2015. (k, e)-Anonymous for Ordinal Data. In 2015 18th International Conference on Network-Based Information Systems. 489–493. https://doi.org/10.1109/NBiS.2015.118Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Surapon Riyana, Srikul Nanthachumphu, and Noppamas Riyana. 2020. Achieving Privacy Preservation Constraints in Missing-Value Datasets. SN Comput. Sci. 1, 4 (2020), 227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00241-9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Surapon Riyana and Juggapong Natwichai. 2018. Privacy preservation for recommendation databases. Serv. Oriented Comput. Appl. 12, 3-4 (2018), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11761-018-0248-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Surapon Riyana, Noppamas Riyana, and Srikul Nanthachumphu. 2017. Enhanced (k, e)-anonymous for categorical data. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software and Computer Applications. 62–67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Surapon Riyana, Noppamas Riyana, and Srikul Nanthachumphu. 2021. An Effective and Efficient Heuristic Privacy Preservation Algorithm for Decremental Anonymization Datasets. In Image Processing and Capsule Networks, Joy Iong-Zong Chen, João Manuel R. S. Tavares, Subarna Shakya, and Abdullah M. Iliyasu (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 244–257.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Surapon Riyana, Noppamas Riyana, and Warunsiri Sujinda. 2021. An Anatomization Model for Farmer Data-Collections. SN Computer Science (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. J. A. Shamsi and M. A. Khojaye. 2018. Understanding Privacy Violations in Big Data Systems. IT Professional 20, 3 (2018), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2018.032501750Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Latanya Sweeney. 2002. k-Anonymity: A Model for Protecting Privacy. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 10, 5 (Oct. 2002), 557–570. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488502001648Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Takako Takai-Igarashi, Kengo Kinoshita, Masao Nagasaki, Soichi Ogishima, Naoki Nakamura, Sachiko Nagase, Satoshi Nagaie, Tomo Saito, Fuji Nagami, Naoko Minegishi, Yoichi Suzuki, Kichiya Suzuki, Hiroaki Hashizume, Shinichi Kuriyama, Atsushi Hozawa, Nobuo Yaegashi, Shigeo Kure, Gen Tamiya, Yoshio Kawaguchi, and Masayuki Tamamoto. 2017. Security controls in an integrated Biobank to protect privacy in data sharing: Rationale and study design. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 17 (07 2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0494-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Manolis Terrovitis, Nikos Mamoulis, and Panos Kalnis. 2008. Privacy-Preserving Anonymization of Set-Valued Data. Proc. VLDB Endow. 1, 1 (Aug. 2008), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.14778/1453856.1453874Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Z. Tu, F. Xu, Y. Li, P. Zhang, and D. Jin. 2018. A New Privacy Breach: User Trajectory Recovery From Aggregated Mobility Data. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 26, 3 (2018), 1446–1459. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2018.2829173Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Raymond Chi-Wing Wong, Jiuyong Li, Ada Wai-Chee Fu, and Ke Wang. 2006. (alpha, k)-Anonymity: An Enhanced k-Anonymity Model for Privacy Preserving Data Publishing(KDD ’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 754–759. https://doi.org/10.1145/1150402.1150499Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Fengli Xu, Zhen Tu, Yong Li, Pengyu Zhang, Xiaoming Fu, and Depeng Jin. 2017. Trajectory Recovery From Ash: User Privacy Is NOT Preserved in Aggregated Mobility Data. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web (Perth, Australia) (WWW ’17). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE, 1241–1250. https://doi.org/10.1145/3038912.3052620Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. C. Yin, J. Xi, R. Sun, and J. Wang. 2018. Location Privacy Protection Based on Differential Privacy Strategy for Big Data in Industrial Internet of Things. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 14, 8 (2018), 3628–3636. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2017.2773646Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Yu Zheng. 2015. Trajectory Data Mining: An Overview. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 6, 3, Article 29 (May 2015), 41 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2743025Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A Privacy Preservation Model for RFID Data-Collections is Highly Secure and More Efficient than LKC-Privacy
          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          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
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            IAIT '21: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Advances in Information Technology
            June 2021
            281 pages
            ISBN:9781450390125
            DOI:10.1145/3468784

            Copyright © 2021 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 20 July 2021

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate20of47submissions,43%

          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