Privacy Analysis The Anonymity Dilemma Sample Clauses

Privacy Analysis The Anonymity Dilemma. It is known apriori to the at- xxxxxx that all nodes ultimately communicate with HN. As the node identifier idN is always masked (by taking an XOR Table 3: Overheads associated with Xx et al.’s scheme Index Node N Hub Node HN Computation Overhead Communication Overhead Storage Overhead 3h + 7⊕ 5B bits 3B bits 5h + 12⊕ 4B + 16 bits (B + 16m) bits A protocol is carried out between node N and HN. A passive attacker A observes the contents of the messages being ex- changed. From Step 1 of Section 2.1.3, A records the value yN = xN ⊕rN. Then, from Step 3 of Sec 2.1.3, A records α = xN ⊕ fN. Now, A obtains the value γ = rN ⊕ fN = α ⊕ yN. of it with a fresh random value), anonymity in Li et al.’s pro- tocol is preserved from “direct” privacy attacks. However, now consider the situation depicted in Fig. 3, where an inter- mediary node IN is providing the relaying service to various Further, records the values η and µ from Step 3 of Sec- tion 2.1.3 and uses γ to compute: a+ = γ ⊕η; b+ = γ ⊕ µ. N N nodes N. In the second pass of Xx et al.’s scheme, it is not N N