Pebbling and Proofs of Work
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The paper proposes to use memory-hard functions to delete encrypted sensor data at the cloud during the state transition phase.
“We propose to use memory-hard functions [6, 13, 18, 19] to delete encrypted sensor data at the cloud, during state transition phase.”
From IoT Expunge: Implementing Verifiable Retention of IoT Data (2020) · cites this paper as [19]
The paper provides a verifiable data deletion or expunge protocol based on memory-hard functions that does not exploit any trusted party to execute verification.
“A verifiable data deletion/expunge protocol based on memoryhard functions [6, 18, 19] (§5.2 and §5.3), which do not exploit any trusted-party to execute verification.”
From IoT Expunge: Implementing Verifiable Retention of IoT Data (2020) · cites this paper as [19]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dziembowski, S., Faust, S., Kolmogorov, V., & Pietrzak, K. (2015) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-48000-7_29 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
IoT Expunge: Implementing Verifiable Retention of IoT Data
Panwar, N., Sharma, S., Gupta, P., Ghosh, D., Mehrotra, S., & Venkatasubramanian, N. (2020) · Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy · doi:10.1145/3374664.3375737 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“• A verifiable data deletion/expunge protocol based on memoryhard functions [6, 18, 19] (§5.”
Method
- Authors
- Dwork, C., Naor, M., & Wee, H.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 2005
- Pages
- 37-54
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W1875376608
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.71
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Complexity and Algorithms in Graphs
- Keywords
- pebbling, denial-of-service attacks, spam prevention, table compression, space-time tradeoff
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
