Private Information Retrieval Through Wiretap Channel II: Privacy Meets Security

January 18, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Transactions on Information Theory

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Karim Banawan, Sennur Ulukus arXiv ID 1801.06171 Category cs.IT: Information Theory Cross-listed cs.CR Citations 57 Venue IEEE Transactions on Information Theory Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
We consider the problem of private information retrieval through wiretap channel II (PIR-WTC-II). In PIR-WTC-II, a user wants to retrieve a single message (file) privately out of $M$ messages, which are stored in $N$ replicated and non-communicating databases. An external eavesdropper observes a fraction $ΞΌ_n$ (of its choice) of the traffic exchanged between the $n$th database and the user. In addition to the privacy constraint, the databases should encode the returned answer strings such that the eavesdropper learns absolutely nothing about the \emph{contents} of the databases. We aim at characterizing the capacity of the PIR-WTC-II under the combined privacy and security constraints. We obtain a general upper bound for the problem in the form of a max-min optimization problem, which extends the converse proof of the PIR problem under asymmetric traffic constraints. We propose an achievability scheme that satisfies the security constraint by encoding a secret key, which is generated securely at each database, into an artificial noise vector using an MDS code. The user and the databases operate at one of the corner points of the achievable scheme for the PIR under asymmetric traffic constraints such that the retrieval rate is maximized under the imposed security constraint. The upper bound and the lower bound match for the case of $M=2$ and $M=3$ messages, for any $N$, and any $\boldsymbolΞΌ=(ΞΌ_1, \cdots, ΞΌ_N)$.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Information Theory

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted