Article

Efficient fork-linearizable access to untrusted shared memory

Authors:

Christian Cachin,

Alexander ShraerAuthors Info & Claims

PODC '07: Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing

Pages 129 - 138

https://doi.org/10.1145/1281100.1281121

Published: 12 August 2007 Publication History

Abstract

When data is stored on a faulty server that is accessed concurrently by multiple clients, the server may present inconsistent data to different clients. For example, the server might complete a write operation of one client, but respond with stale data to another client. Mazières and Shasha (PODC 2002) introduced the notion of fork-consistency, also called fork-linearizability, which ensures that the operations seen by every client are linearizable and guarantees that if the server causes the views of two clients to differ in a single operation, they may never again see each other's updates after that without the server being exposed as faulty. In this paper, we improve the communication complexity of their fork-linearizable storage access protocol with n clients from Ω(n²) to O(n). We also prove that in every such protocol, a reader must wait for a concurrent writer. This explains a seeming limitation of their and of our improved protocol. Furthermore, we give novel characterizations of fork-linearizability and prove that it is neither stronger nor weaker than sequential consistency.

References

[1]

I. Abraham, G. Chockler, I. Keidar, and D. Malkhi. Byzantine disk Paxos: Optimal resilience with Byzantine shared memory. Distributed Computing, 18(5):387--408, 2006.

Digital Library

[2]

H. Attiya and J. Welch. Distributed Computing: Fundamentals, Simulations and Advanced Topics. Wiley, second edition, 2004.

Digital Library

[3]

M. Blum, W. Evans, P. Gemmell, S. Kannan, and M. Naor. Checking the correctness of memories. Algorithmica, 12:225--244, 1994.

Digital Library

[4]

C. Cachin, A. Shelat, and A. Shraer. Efficient fork-linearizable access to untrusted shared memory. TR RZ3688, IBM Research, Apr. 2007.

[5]

D. Clarke, S. Devadas, M. van Dijk, B. Gassend, and G. E. Suh. Incremental multiset hash functions and their application to memory integrity checking. In ASIACRYPT 2003.

[6]

D. Clarke, G. E. Suh, B. Gassend, A. Sudan, M. van Dijk, and S. Devadas. Towards constant bandwidth overhead integrity checking of untrusted data. In Proc. 26th IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy, 2005.

Digital Library

[7]

K. Fu, F. Kaashoek, and D. Mazières. Fast and secure distributed read-only file system. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 20(1):1--24, Feb. 2002.

Digital Library

[8]

K. E. Fu. Group sharing and random access in cryptographic storage file systems. Master Thesis, MIT LCS, 1998.

[9]

M. Herlihy. Wait-free synchronization. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 11(1):124--149, Jan. 1991.

Digital Library

[10]

M. Herlihy, V. Luchangco, and M. Moir. Obstruction-free synchronization: Double-ended queues as an example. In ICDCS 2003, pages 522--529.

Digital Library

[11]

M. P. Herlihy and J. M. Wing. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 12(3):463--492, July 1990.

Digital Library

[12]

P. Jayanti, T. D. Chandra, and S. Toueg. Fault-tolerant wait-free shared objects. J. ACM, 45(3):451--500, May 1998.

Digital Library

[13]

L. Lamport. On interprocess communication. Distributed Computing, 1(2):77--85, 86--101, 1986.

[14]

J. Li, M. Krohn, D. Mazires, and D. Shasha. Secure untrusted data repository (SUNDR). In OSDI, pages 121--136, 2004.

Digital Library

[15]

N. A. Lynch. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1996.

Digital Library

[16]

N. A. Lynch and M. R. Tuttle. An introduction to input/output automata. CWI Quaterly, 2(3):219--246, Sept. 1989.

[17]

J.-P. Martin, L. Alvisi, and M. Dahlin. Minimal Byzantine storage. In DISC 2002, pages 311--325.

Digital Library

[18]

D. Mazières and D. Shasha. Building secure file systems out of Byzantine storage. In PODC, pages 108--117, 2002.

Digital Library

[19]

A. Oprea and M. K. Reiter. On consistency of encrypted files. In DISC, pages 254--268, 2006.

Digital Library

[20]

M. Pease, R. Shostak, and L. Lamport. Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM, 27(2):228--234, Apr. 1980.

Digital Library

Cited By

Chang TLu C(2019)An Auditing Scheme for Cloud-Based Checkout SystemsSecurity with Intelligent Computing and Big-data Services10.1007/978-3-030-16946-6_33(423-437)Online publication date: 17-Apr-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16946-6_33
Cachin CGhosh EPapadopoulos DTackmann B(2018)Stateful Multi-client Verifiable ComputationApplied Cryptography and Network Security10.1007/978-3-319-93387-0_33(637-656)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93387-0_33
Brandenburger MCachin CKnežević N(2017)Don’t Trust the Cloud, VerifyACM Transactions on Privacy and Security10.1145/307976220:3(1-30)Online publication date: 31-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3079762
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Efficient fork-linearizable access to untrusted shared memory
1. Computer systems organization
  1. Architectures
    1. Distributed architectures
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software organization and properties
    1. Software system structures
      1. Distributed systems organizing principles

Recommendations

Fork-consistent constructions from registers
PODC '11: Proceedings of the 30th annual ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS symposium on Principles of distributed computing

So far, all implementations providing fork-consistent semantics are based on objects with read-modify-write capabilities (also termed servers). We propose constructions of fork-consistent shared objects from single-writer multiple-reader(SWMR) read/...
Abortable Fork-Linearizable Storage
OPODIS '09: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems

We address the problem of emulating a shared read/write memory in a message passing system using a storage server prone to Byzantine failures. Although cryptography can be used to ensure confidentiality and integrity of the data, nothing can prevent a ...
Eventually linearizable shared objects
PODC '10: Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS symposium on Principles of distributed computing

Linearizability is the strongest known consistency property of shared objects. In asynchronous message passing systems, Linearizability can be achieved with ◊S and a majority of correct processes. In this paper we introduce the notion of Eventual ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

PODC '07: Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing

August 2007

424 pages

ISBN:9781595936165

DOI:10.1145/1281100

General Chair:
Indranil Gupta
UIUC, USA
,
Program Chair:
Rogert Wattenhofer
ETH Zurich, Switzerland

Copyright © 2007 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 August 2007

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Conference

PODC07

Sponsor:

PODC07: ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing 2007

August 12 - 15, 2007

Oregon, Portland, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 740 of 2,477 submissions, 30%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

33
Total Citations
View Citations
377
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Chang TLu C(2019)An Auditing Scheme for Cloud-Based Checkout SystemsSecurity with Intelligent Computing and Big-data Services10.1007/978-3-030-16946-6_33(423-437)Online publication date: 17-Apr-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16946-6_33
Cachin CGhosh EPapadopoulos DTackmann B(2018)Stateful Multi-client Verifiable ComputationApplied Cryptography and Network Security10.1007/978-3-319-93387-0_33(637-656)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93387-0_33
Brandenburger MCachin CKnežević N(2017)Don’t Trust the Cloud, VerifyACM Transactions on Privacy and Security10.1145/307976220:3(1-30)Online publication date: 31-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3079762
Brandenburger MCachin CLorenz MKapitza R(2017)Rollback and Forking Detection for Trusted Execution Environments Using Lightweight Collective Memory2017 47th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN)10.1109/DSN.2017.45(157-168)Online publication date: Jun-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/DSN.2017.45
Viotti PVukolić M(2016)Consistency in Non-Transactional Distributed Storage SystemsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/292696549:1(1-34)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2926965
Hwang GHuang WPeng JLin Y(2016)Fulfilling mutual nonrepudiation for cloud storageConcurrency and Computation: Practice & Experience10.1002/cpe.331528:3(583-599)Online publication date: 10-Mar-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/cpe.3315
Ruffing TKate ASchröder DRay ILi NKruegel C(2015)Liar, Liar, Coins on Fire!Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security10.1145/2810103.2813686(219-230)Online publication date: 12-Oct-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2810103.2813686
Brandenburger MCachin CKnežević N(2015)Don't trust the cloud, verifyProceedings of the 8th ACM International Systems and Storage Conference10.1145/2757667.2757681(1-11)Online publication date: 26-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2757667.2757681
Cachin CAhn GYung MLi N(2014)Integrity, Consistency, and Verification of Remote ComputationProceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security10.1145/2660267.2660575(1538-1539)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2660267.2660575
Cachin COhrimenko O(2014)Verifying the Consistency of Remote Untrusted Services with Commutative OperationsPrinciples of Distributed Systems10.1007/978-3-319-14472-6_1(1-16)Online publication date: 2014
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14472-6_1
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents