| Literature DB >> 31963336 |
Yang Ming1, Xiaopeng Yu1.
Abstract
Vehicular sensor networks (VSNs) have emerged as a paradigm for improving traffic safety in urban cities. However, there are still several issues with VSNs. Vehicles equipped with sensing devices usually upload large amounts of data reports to a remote cloud center for processing and analyzing, causing heavy computation and communication costs. Additionally, to choose an optimal route, it is required for vehicles to query the remote cloud center to obtain road conditions of the potential moving route, leading to an increased communication delay and leakage of location privacy. To solve these problems, this paper proposes an efficient privacy-preserving data sharing (EP 2 DS) scheme for fog-assisted vehicular sensor networks. Specifically, the proposed scheme utilizes fog computing to provide local data sharing with low latency; furthermore, it exploits a super-increasing sequence to format the sensing data of different road segments into one report, thus saving on the resources of communication and computation. In addition, using the modified oblivious transfer technology, the proposed scheme can query the road conditions of the potential moving route without disclosing the query location. Finally, an analysis of security suggests that the proposed scheme can satisfy all the requirements for security and privacy, with the evaluation results indicating that the proposed scheme leads to low costs in computation and communication.Entities:
Keywords: data sharing; fog computing; privacy preserving; vehicular sensor networks
Year: 2020 PMID: 31963336 PMCID: PMC7014476 DOI: 10.3390/s20020514
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1System model.
Notations
| Symbol | Definition |
|---|---|
|
| Trusted authority |
|
| Cloud center |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| The |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| The |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| The data query vehicle |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| Identifier of the segment |
|
| Maximum value of sensory data |
|
| The total number of segments |
|
| The total number of fog nodes |
|
| The total number of vehicles |
|
| Maximum length of sensory data |
|
| The vehicles’ sharing key |
|
| The sensory data captured by |
|
| If |
|
| Eight one-way hash functions, |
| ⊕ | The exclusive OR operation |
|
| Two large prime numbers |
|
| The finite field over |
|
| An additive group with the order |
|
| A generator of |
Figure 2Data flows in the data collection and data query phases.
Security comparisons. Efficient privacy-preserving data sharing (EPDS), √ represents “satisfy” and × denotes “does not satisfy”.
| Security | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 | S10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rabieh et al.’s scheme [ |
|
| × | × | × |
|
|
|
|
|
| Sun et al.’s scheme [ |
|
| × |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kong et al.’s scheme [ |
|
|
| × | × |
|
| × |
| × |
| Paulet et al.’s scheme [ | × |
|
| × | × |
| × | × | × | × |
| Zhu et al.’s scheme [ |
|
|
| × | × |
|
| × |
| × |
| EP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Runtime of cryptographic operation (millisecond).
| Notations | Descriptions | Runtime |
|---|---|---|
|
| Scalar multiplication operation in | 0.3851 |
|
| Solving the DL operation mod | 0.6438 |
|
| The exponentiation operation in | 2.0289 |
|
| The multiplication operation in | 1.4293 |
|
| Map to point hash function operation | 3.5819 |
|
| Bilinear pairing operation in | 10.3092 |
Comparison of computation costs.
| Scheme | Data Collection Phase | Data Query Phase | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| [ | − | − | |||
| = 6.9164 ms | = 10.3092 | =10.3092 | |||
| [ | − | − | |||
| = 15.1967 ms | = 1.4293 | =2.0289 | |||
| [ |
| ||||
| = 13.8328 ms | = 2.8586 | =16.6914 | =28.4953 ms | =27.0660 ms | |
| [ | − | − | − | 6m | |
| =25.4066 ms | =24.8070 | ||||
| [ | − | − | − | ||
| =30.7629 ms | =46.9540 ms | ||||
| EP |
|
| |||
| =1.9255 ms | =0.3851 | =0.3851 | =5.5237 ms | =3.0808 ms | |
Figure 3Computation costs in the data collection phase. (a) Computation costs of (b) Computation costs of vs. number of vehicles; (c) Computation costs of vs. number of .
Figure 4Computation costs in the data query phase. (a) Computation costs of (b) Computation costs of vs. number of segments.
Comparison of the communication costs.
| Scheme | Data Collection Phase | Data Query Phase | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data Report Size | Query Report Size | Response Report Size | |
| Rabieh et al.’s scheme [ | 260 bytes | − | − |
| Sun et al.’s scheme [ | 516 bytes | − | − |
| Kong et al.’s scheme [ | 1152 bytes | 1152 bytes | 1664 bytes |
| Paulet et al.’s scheme [ | − | 256 bytes | 256 |
| Zhu et al.’s scheme [ | − | 324 bytes | 320 bytes |
| EP | 172 bytes | 172 bytes | 148 bytes |
Figure 5Comparison of the data report size.
Figure 6(a) Comparison of the query report size; (b) Comparison of the response report size.