Maura Paterson (2005) Dynamic Frameproof Codes.
Full text access: Open
There are many schemes in the literature for protecting digital data from piracy by the use of digital fingerprinting, such as frameproof codes, which prevent traitorous users from colluding to frame an innocent user, and traitor-tracing schemes, which enable the identification of users involved in piracy. The concept of traitor tracing has been applied to a digital broadcast setting in the form of dynamic traitor-tracing schemes and sequential traitor-tracing schemes, which could be used to combat piracy of pay-TV broadcasts, for example. In this thesis we explore the possibility of extending the properties of frameproof codes to this dynamic model. We investigate the construction of l-sequential c-frameproof codes, which prevent framing without requiring information obtained from a pirate broadcast. We show that they are closely related to the ordinary frameproof codes, which enables us to construct examples of these schemes and to establish bounds on the number of users they support. We then define l-dynamic c-frameproof codes that can prevent framing more efficiently than the sequential codes through the use of the pirate broadcast information. We give constructions for schemes supporting an optimal number of users in the cases where the number c of users colluding in piracy satisfies c greater than or equal to 2 or c=1. Finally we consider sliding-window l-dynamic frameproof codes that provide ongoing protection against framing by making use of the pirate broadcast. We provide constructions of such schemes and establish bounds on the number of users they support. In the case of a binary alphabet we use geometric structures to describe constructions, and provide new bounds. We then go on to provide two families of constructions based on particular parameters, and we show that some of these constructions are optimal for the given parameters.
This is a Published version This version's date is: 13/12/2005 This item is peer reviewed
https://repository.royalholloway.ac.uk/items/06b214cf-d4ad-804f-1183-be5cac48fb1f/1/
Deposited by () on 13-Jul-2010 in Royal Holloway Research Online.Last modified on 10-Dec-2010
[1] Noga Alon and Uri Stav. New bounds on parent-identifying codes:The case of multiple parents. preprint, 2002. available fromwww.math.tau.ac.il/~nogaa/.
[2] Alexander Barg, G. Robert Blakely, and Gregory Kabatiansky. Digitalfingerprinting codes: Problems statements, constructions, identificationof traitors. Technical Report 2001-52, DIMACS, December 2001. availablefrom http://dimacs.rutgers.edu.TechnicalReports.
[3] Alexander Barg and Gregory Kabatiansky. A class of I.P.P. codes withefficient identification. Technical Report 2002-36, DIMACS, September2002. available from http://dimacs.rutgers.edu.TechnicalReports.
[4] Omer Berkman, Michal Parnas, and Jiˇr´ı Sgall. Efficient dynamic traitortracing. SIAM Journal on Computing, 30:1802–1828, 2001.
[5] Simon R. Blackburn. Combinatorial schemes for protecting digital con-tent. In C. D. Wensley, editor, Surveys in Combinatorics 2003, volume307 of LMS lecture notes series, pages 43–78. Cambridge University Press,2003.
[6] Simon R. Blackburn. Frameproof codes. SIAM Journal on Discrete Math-ematics, 16(3):499–510, 2003.
[7] Dan Boneh and Matthew Franklin. An efficient public key traitor trac-ing scheme. In M. Wiener, editor, Advances in Cryptology -Crypto ’99,volume 1666 of LNCS, pages 338–353. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[8] Dan Boneh and James Shaw. Collusion-secure fingerprinting for digitaldata. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 44(5):1897–1905, 1998.
[9] Benny Chor, Amos Fiat, and Moni Naor. Tracing traitors. In Advancesin Cryptology -Crypto ’94, volume 839 of LNCS, pages 257–270. Springer-Verlag, 1994.
[10] Benny Chor, Amos Fiat, Moni Naor, and Benny Pinkas. Tracing traitors.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 46(3):893–910, May 2000.
[11] G´erard D. Cohen and Sylvia B. Encheva. Efficient constructions of frame-proof codes. Electronics Letters, 36:1840–1842, 2000.
[12] Amos Fiat and Tamir Tassa. Dynamic traitor tracing. In Advances inCryptology -Crypto ’99, volume 1666 of LNCS, pages 354–371. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[13] Reihaneh Safavi-Naini and Yejing Wang. Sequential traitor tracing. IEEETransactions on Information Theory, 49(5):1319–1326, 2003.
[14] Jessica N. Staddon, Douglas R. Stinson, and Ruizhong Wei. Combinato-rial properties of frameproof and traceability codes. IEEE Transactionson Information Theory, 47:1042–1049, 2001.
[15] Douglas R. Stinson and RuizhongWei. Combinatorial properties and con-structions of traceability schemes and frameproof codes. SIAM Journalon Discrete Mathematics, 11:41–53, 1998.
[16] Roger James Stockwell. Frameproof Codes: Combinatorial Properties andConstructions. PhD thesis, Royal Holloway University of London, 2002.
[17] Mitchell D. Swanson, Mei Kobayashi, and Ahmed H. Tewfik. Multimediadata-embedding and watermarking technologies. Proceedings of the IEEE,86:1064–1087, 1998.
[18] Dongvu Tonien and Reihaneh Safavi-Naini. Recursive constructions of se-cure codes and hash families using difference function families. CryptologyePrint Archive, Report 2005/184, 2005. http://eprint.iacr.org/.
[19] Tran van Trung and Sosina Martirosyan. On a class of traceabilitycodes. preprint, University of Essen, 2002. available from www.exp-math.uni-essen.de/~trung/.