跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+4278新增论文
+3391其中 AI 相关
+108已有论文修订
+122新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 01:50 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 01:49各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 01:50 — 2026-11-05 01:50(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-05 01:50最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 01:49库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-04 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

12,955 已收录论文11,066 AI 相关3,088 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 01:47(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.36001

Merkle-Tree-Based Verifiable Public Data Auditing for Cloud Object Storage Using Smart Contracts

Siri Reddy Tadi, K. Gangadhara Rao, M. Venu Gopalachari, C. Chetann Reddy, Jaswanth Bhimireddy

Owners of data in cloud object storage cannot directly check whether the provider still keeps every object unchanged. Existing research mostly checks blocks inside files or relies on third-party auditors, and less attention has been given to checking each object against a public blockchain reference while measuring the cost. A full-data audit downloads every object and compares it with a saved hash list, which is slow and only as reliable as that list. We propose a public auditing system in which the SHA-256 hash of each object and its name forms a leaf of a Merkle tree, so the whole dataset is represented by one Merkle root. This root is stored in an Ethereum smart contract as a trusted public record, while the objects stay with the provider. An auditor downloads an object, rebuilds the root using a short Merkle proof and compares it with the stored root, marking the object as intact, modified or missing. In five experiments on an S3-compatible store and a local Hardhat blockchain (normal audit, single- and multiple-object tampering, deletion and scalability), the system detected 15 of 15 single modifications, 2,205 of 2,205 modified objects and 830 of 830 deleted objects with no false alarms. The proof needed only 14 hashes for 10,000 objects, so checking one object took about 10 ms and a 100-object sample about 150 ms regardless of dataset size, while a full audit of 10,000 objects (14.3 s) took about as long as downloading them (13.5 s). Storing the root cost 91,863 gas, 252 times less than storing 1,000 hashes on-chain. The system thus shows exactly which objects were modified or are missing, with its main savings coming from checking selected objects.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CR · cs.DC
arXiv ↗PDF ↗