Database Integrity:

2018 ◽  
pp. 103-133
Keyword(s):  
2009 ◽  
pp. 212-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendrik Decker ◽  
Davide Martinenghi

Integrity constraints (or simply “constraints”) are formal representations of invariant conditions for the semantic correctness of database records. Constraints can be expressed in declarative languages such as datalog, predicate logic, or SQL. This article highlights the historical background of integrity constraints and the essential features of their simplified incremental evaluation. It concludes with an outlook on future trends.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lancine Camara ◽  
Junyi Li ◽  
Renfa Li ◽  
Wenyong Xie

Nowadays, internet is becoming a suitable way of accessing the databases. Such data are exposed to various types of attack with the aim to confuse the ownership proofing or the content protection. In this paper, we propose a new approach based on fragile zero watermarking for the authentication of numeric relational data. Contrary to some previous databases watermarking techniques which cause some distortions in the original database and may not preserve the data usability constraints, our approach simply seeks to generate the watermark from the original database. First, the adopted method partitions the database relation into independent square matrix groups. Then, group-based watermarks are securely generated and registered in a trusted third party. The integrity verification is performed by computing the determinant and the diagonal’s minor for each group. As a result, tampering can be localized up to attribute group level. Theoretical and experimental results demonstrate that the proposed technique is resilient against tuples insertion, tuples deletion, and attributes values modification attacks. Furthermore, comparison with recent related effort shows that our scheme performs better in detecting multifaceted attacks.


1979 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 513-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilfred J. Hansen
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian X. Weichenberger ◽  
Edwin Pozharski ◽  
Bernhard Rupp

Thede factocommoditization of biomolecular crystallography as a result of almost disruptive instrumentation automation and continuing improvement of software allows any sensibly trained structural biologist to conduct crystallographic studies of biomolecules with reasonably valid outcomes: that is, models based on properly interpreted electron density. Robust validation has led to major mistakes in the protein part of structure models becoming rare, but some depositions of protein–peptide complex structure models, which generally carry significant interest to the scientific community, still contain erroneous models of the bound peptide ligand. Here, the protein small-molecule ligand validation toolTwilightis updated to include peptide ligands. (i) The primary technical reasons and potential human factors leading to problems in ligand structure models are presented; (ii) a new method used to score peptide-ligand models is presented; (iii) a few instructive and specific examples, including an electron-density-based analysis of peptide-ligand structures that do not contain any ligands, are discussed in detail; (iv) means to avoid such mistakes and the implications for database integrity are discussed and (v) some suggestions as to how journal editors could help to expunge errors from the Protein Data Bank are provided.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document