scholarly journals An Efficient Methodologies for Data Integrity in Cloud Storage

Majority of the organization uses cloud for storage purpose in order to reduce the cost as well as maintenance. Due to increasing threat from internal and external sources, there would be possibility of corruption in the cloud storage files. Thus the storage must to be monitored periodically for integrity checking. Since most of the Data Owners have limited resources thus the responsibility of integrity checking goes to the Third Party Auditors (TPA). In this paper, we have proposed 2 methodologies of Integrity Checking in Cloud Storage (1) Enhanced Dynamic Hash Tree – n Versions (EDHT-n), which has best performance in term of time and space complexity compared to the existing methods.(2) Hybrid Enhanced Dynamic Hash Tree (HEDHT), which is best suited for very huge number of files in a directory

Majority of the organization uses cloud for storage purpose in order to reduce the cost as well as maintenance. Due to increasing threat from internal and external sources, there would be possibility of corruption in the cloud storage files. Thus the storage must to be monitored periodically for integrity checking. Since most of the Data Owners have limited resources thus the responsibility of integrity checking goes to the Third Party Auditors (TPA). Usually the static way of deciding to use particular hash tree methodology to store the cloud storage meta-data, which is mainly used for integrity checking throughout is inappropriate for two main reasons, firstly, due to more fluctuated loss or corrupted cloud data, secondly, based on the variations in the number of files in the cloud users’ directory; Initially the static approach would be good but it may not be optimal solution at the later period. therefore, in this paper, we have proposed Adaptive Integrity Checking method (AIC), which would lead a way for adaptive dynamic hash tree methodology for holding the cloud storage meta-data; which would drastically increases the performance of integrity checking in terms of both time and space complexity besides the benefits obtained in the EDHT-n version and HEDHT methodologies of handling the cloud storage integrity checking.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e015594 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Mahon ◽  
Carlos Lifschitz ◽  
Thomas Ludwig ◽  
Nikhil Thapar ◽  
Julie Glanville ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo estimate the cost of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) and related signs and symptoms in infants to the third party payer and to parents.Study designTo estimate the cost of illness (COI) of infant FGIDs, a two-stage process was applied: a systematic literature review and a COI calculation. As no pertinent papers were found in the systematic literature review, a ‘de novo’ analysis was performed. For the latter, the potential costs for the third party payer (the National Health Service (NHS) in England) and for parents/carers for the treatment of FGIDs in infants were calculated, by using publicly available data. In constructing the calculation, estimates and assumptions (where necessary) were chosen to provide a lower bound (minimum) of the potential overall cost. In doing so, the interpretation of the calculation is that the true COI can be no lower than that estimated.ResultsOur calculation estimated that the total costs of treating FGIDs in infants in England were at least £72.3 million per year in 2014/2015 of which £49.1 million was NHS expenditure on prescriptions, community care and hospital treatment. Parents incurred £23.2 million in costs through purchase of over the counter remedies.ConclusionsThe total cost presented here is likely to be a significant underestimate as only lower bound estimates were used where applicable, and for example, costs of alternative therapies, inpatient treatments or diagnostic tests, and time off work by parents could not be adequately estimated and were omitted from the calculation. The number and kind of prescribed products and products sold over the counter to treat FGIDs suggest that there are gaps between treatment guidelines, which emphasise parental reassurance and nutritional advice, and their implementation.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Behnke ◽  
Diana Armbruster ◽  
Anja Strobel

Safeguarding the rights of minorities is crucial for just societies. However, there are conceivable situations were minority rights might seriously impede the rights of the majority. Favoring the minority in such cases constitutes a violation of utilitarian principles. To investigate the emotional, cognitive, and punitive responses of observers of such utilitarian rule transgressions, we conducted an online study with 1004 participants. Two moral scenarios (vaccine policy and epidemic) were rephrased in the third-party perspective. In both scenarios the protagonist opted against the utilitarian option which resulted in more fatalities in total, but avoided harm to a minority. The scenarios varied in whether the minority would have been harmed accidentally or deliberate. The majority of participants chose not to punish the scenarios’ protagonists at all. However, 30.5% judged that protecting the minority over the interests of the majority when only accidental harm would have occurred (vaccine policy) was worthy of punishment. In comparison, only 11.5% opted to punish a protagonist whose decision avoided deliberate harm to a minority at the cost of the majority (epidemic). Emotional responses and appropriateness ratings paralleled these results. Furthermore, complex personality × situation interactions revealed the influence of personality features, i.e., psychopathy, empathy, altruism, authoritarianism, need for cognition and faith in intuition, on participants’ responses. The results further underscore the need to consider the interaction of situational features and inter-individual differences in moral decisions and sense of justice.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), particularly mediation, plays a key role in reducing the costs of civil disputes by fomenting the early settlement of cases. This chapter discusses ADR processes; advantages or disadvantages of ADR and litigation; the cost of ADR; reference to ADR; and court involvement in ADR. Adjudicative ADR results in the third party neutral deciding the dispute or difference between the parties. Non-adjudicative ADR processes involve moving the parties towards reaching a compromise agreement between themselves. Rules of court require parties to consider using ADR. Sanctions may be imposed on parties who act unreasonably.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), particularly mediation, plays a key role in reducing the costs of civil disputes by fomenting the early settlement of cases. This chapter discusses ADR processes; advantages or disadvantages of ADR and litigation; the cost of ADR; reference to ADR; and court involvement in ADR. Adjudicative ADR results in the third party neutral deciding the dispute or difference between the parties. Non-adjudicative ADR processes involve moving the parties towards reaching a compromise agreement between themselves. Rules of court require parties to consider using ADR. Sanctions may be imposed on parties who act unreasonably.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), particularly mediation, plays a key role in reducing the costs of civil disputes by fomenting the early settlement of cases. This chapter discusses ADR processes; advantages or disadvantages of ADR and litigation; the cost of ADR; reference to ADR; and court involvement in ADR. Adjudicative ADR results in the third party neutral deciding the dispute or difference between the parties. Non-adjudicative ADR processes involve moving the parties towards reaching a compromise agreement between themselves. Rules of court require parties to consider using ADR. Sanctions may be imposed on parties who act unreasonably.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), particularly mediation, plays a key role in reducing the costs of civil disputes by fomenting the early settlement of cases. This chapter discusses ADR processes; advantages or disadvantages of ADR and litigation; the cost of ADR; reference to ADR; and court involvement in ADR. Adjudicative ADR results in the third party neutral deciding the dispute or difference between the parties. Non-adjudicative ADR processes involve moving the parties towards reaching a compromise agreement between themselves. Rules of court require parties to consider using ADR. Sanctions may be imposed on parties who act unreasonably.


2014 ◽  
Vol 687-691 ◽  
pp. 3015-3018
Author(s):  
Zhi Yi Shao ◽  
Bo Yang

In cloud computing, customers outsource their data to the cloud storage, as they no long physically possess the data, how to perform the integrity verification becomes more difficult. Our protocol follows Shacham and Waters’s ideas (2013). We solve the problem of customer’s privacy against both the cloud and the third-party verifier and formally prove that the complex bilinear operations can be removed under the customer’s help. Every step of our improvements is based on rigorous proofs.


2011 ◽  
Vol 121-126 ◽  
pp. 4832-4836
Author(s):  
Tian Zi Chai ◽  
Meng Wei Tong

In this paper, we analyse the structure of third-party logistics cost. We specially analyzes influence factor of transportation cost which account for 1/3 to 2/3 of the third-party logistics from the view of system dynamics. We establish the system dynamics model of transportation cost, and further more, we give the Vensim equations and explanation for it.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document