On the Privacy of Counting Bloom Filters Under a Black-Box Attacker
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, ISSN: 1941-0018, Vol: 20, Issue: 5, Page: 4434-4440
2023
- 1Citations
- 5Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Counting Bloom Filters (CBFs) are approximate membership checking data structures, and it is normally believed that at most an approximate reconstruction of the underlying set can be derived when interacting with a CBF. This paper decisively refutes this assumption. In a recent paper, we considered the privacy of CBFs when the attacker has access to the implementation details and thus, it sees the filter as a white-box. In that setting, we showed that the attacker may be able to extract the elements stored in the filter when the number of false positives over the entire universe is not significantly larger than the number of elements stored in the filter. In this work, we consider a black-box attacker that can only perform user interactions on the CBF to insert, remove and query elements with no knowledge of the filter implementation details. We show that even in this case, an attacker may be able to extract information from the filter at the cost of using more complex and time-consuming attack algorithms. The proposed algorithms have been implemented and compared with the white-box attack, showing that in most cases, almost the same information can be extracted from the filter.
Bibliographic Details
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know