- Open Access
Secure Authentication-Management human-centric Scheme for trusting personal resource information on mobile cloud computing with blockchain
© The Author(s) 2018
- Received: 28 March 2018
- Accepted: 19 April 2018
- Published: 11 May 2018
The recent advances in information technology for mobile devices have increased the work efficiency of users, the mobility of compact mobile devices, and the convenience of location independence. However, mobile devices have limited computing power and storage capacity, so mobile cloud computing is being researched to overcome these limitations in mobile devices. Mobile cloud computing is divided into two methods: the use of external cloud services and the use of mobile resource management without a cloud server (MRM), which integrates the computing and storage resources of nearby mobile devices. Because mobile devices can freely participate in MRM, it is critical to have authentication technology to determine the correctness of information regarding resources. Conventional technologies require strong authentication techniques because they have vulnerabilities that can easily be tampered with via man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. This paper proposes the Secure Authentication Management human-centric Scheme (SAMS) to authenticate mobile devices using blockchain for trusting resource information in the mobile devices that are participating in the MRM resource pool. The SAMS forms a blockchain based on the resource information of the subordinate client nodes around the master node in the MRM. Devices in the MRM that have not been authorized through the SAMS cannot access or falsify data. To verify the SAMS for application with MRM, it was tested for data falsification by a malicious user accessing the SAMS, and the results show that data falsification is impossible.
- Human-centric Authentication Management
- Mobile cloud computing
- Resource management for human-centric
The performance of mobile devices is advancing with recent developments in information technology. Mobile devices, including smartphones, notebooks, netbooks, and tablets, have improved user efficiency by increasing mobility, providing the convenience of location independence, and making better use of leisure time through a variety of applications. The mobility of these devices is dependent on batteries, and batteries drain fast when high computing is required. Mobile cloud computing is being researched to overcome the limited computing power and storage capacity of mobile devices [1–10].
Mobile cloud computing is divided into two methods: the use of external cloud services and the use of mobile resource management without a cloud server (MRM), which integrates the computing and storage resources of nearby mobile devices. The use of external cloud services is subdivided based on the development method: a service-oriented architecture, in which mobile devices depend on the Internet to connect to the cloud, and an agent-client architecture, in which mobile devices connect to the cloud through agents such as FemtoCell and Cloudlet [8, 10–17, 28].
MRM should be able to provide the trustworthy resource metadata necessary to integrate computing and storage resources because the infrastructure is composed only of mobile devices. Authentication technology is critical in determining the correctness of the resource information since mobile devices can participate freely in the MRM. Conventional authentication techniques, such as knowledge-based, possession-based, and biometric-based authentication methods, are vulnerable to data falsification via man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. Therefore, more powerful authentication technology is required. While 2-factor and multi-factor authentication methods are being used, they require the input of users, which is cumbersome, and they are vulnerable to exposure by shoulder surfing attacks and smudge attacks [18–33].
In this paper, the Secure Authentication Management human-centric Scheme (SAMS) is proposed, which uses blockchain to authenticate mobile devices and trust the resource information in the mobile devices participating in the MRM resource pool. The SAMS creates blocks based on the hash value of the master node and the hash value of the resource information in the subordinate client nodes in the MRM, and it then forms blockchain by connecting the hash values and blocks when the client nodes are added. Devices that have not been authenticated through the SAMS in the MRM cannot access or falsify data. This research evaluates the performance of the SAMS by applying the SAMS to the MRM and verifying the impossibility of data falsification by malicious users accessing the SAMS for human-centric aspect.
“Related works” examines the conventional authentication methods and the blockchain for determining the reliability of mobile devices. “Secure Authentication Management human-centric Scheme (SAMS)” describes the block creation process and authentication procedure for securing the mobile devices in the proposed SAMS. “Design of the SAMS” describes the design for applying the SAMS to the MRM. “Implementation of the SAMS” describes the implemented verification for the authentication of the SAMS with human-centric. “Performance evaluation” analyzes the elapsed time for the authentication of the SAMS and verifies the impossibility of falsifying resource information by artificially attempting to access and falsify data. Finally, “Conclusion” provides the conclusions and suggests future research plans.
Conventional authentication methods
Authentication methods and their advantages and disadvantages
Knowledge-based authentication 
Static knowledge-based authentication
No need for hardware
Low implementation cost
High user convenience
Less secure than the other authentication methods
Vulnerable to various attacks, such as shoulder surfing attacks and smudge attacks
Dynamic knowledge-based authentication
Better security than the static knowledge-based authentication
Questions and answers based on the user’s personal information; no need to set password
Users must memorize their own records because they will not know the questions in advance
Malicious users can access via the exposed personal information of other users
Possession-based authentication 
Better security than the knowledge-based authentication method
Users must possess separate hardware, such as a One Time Password (OTP) terminal
If the terminal is lost, it can lead to security threats
Better security than the knowledge-based authentication method
Higher portability and convenience compared to the hardware type of possession-based authentication
High risk of leakage because it is stored in a logical storage medium
Inherence-based authentication  (Biometric-based authentication)
Based on the user’s physical characteristics
Authentication based on various parts of the user’s body, such as face recognition, iris recognition, fingerprint recognition, vein recognition, and heart rate and ECG recognition
Difficult to implement and manage
Data loss due to physical recognition error
Based on the user’s physical behaviors
Authentication based on the recognition of the user’s behaviors, including voice, typing rhythm, signature pattern, signature pressure, and user motion
Difficult to implement and manage
Vulnerable to a recorded voice
Difficult to set the recognition tolerance range
Multi-factor authentication 
Higher security compared to single-factor authentication
Reduced masquerade threat
Vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks
Difficult to implement and manage
Efficiency: A blockchain is easy to manage and can track complex data logs. Even if diverse mobile devices participate, the complex processes of system integration can be bypassed.
Security: A blockchain has better security than centralized data management. Centralized data management faces the possibility of catastrophic damage due to hacker intrusions. Data falsification is almost impossible with a blockchain because it would require simultaneous control of all the mobile devices in which the data is distributed and then changing all the data stored in the devices.
Resilience: A blockchain does not have a single point of failure (SPOF), as with centralized data management, because all information is shared equally among the participating mobile devices. For this reason, even if some mobile devices subject to errors or performance degradation, an MRM infrastructure with a blockchain is unlikely to receive malicious threats and can easily recover.
Transparency: A blockchain transparently opens all the resource status and usage data by default because it shares the resource metadata with all the participating mobile devices. The exclusive occupation of resources by specific mobile devices inside the MRM infrastructure was prevented in this research.
Mobile resource management without a cloud server (MRM)
Block configuration of the SAMS
SAMS block header
Previous block hash
Hash value of the previous block
Current block hash
Hash value using the previous block hash value and the Merkle Value
Hash value using the MAC, IP, CPU, STORAGE, and MEMORY of the SAMS Mobile Information
Creation time of the current block
Next block hash
The next block hash is added when the next block is created, and the last block value is always zero
Disposable values used in hash functions
SAMS mobile information
MAC address of the mobile device
IP address of the mobile device
CPU usage (%) of the mobile device
Static CPU capacity (GHZ) of the mobile device
Storage usage (%) of the mobile device
Static storage size (GB) of the mobile device
Memory usage (%) of the mobile device
Static memory size (GB) of the mobile device
Step 1: The master node creates its own block and stores the block.
Step 2: When a new client node wants to connect, the client node creates a block. The client node sends its own information and the created block to the master node.
Step 3: The master node creates a block with the received client information.
Step 4: The master node determines whether the client block that it created is identical to the block received from the client node.
Step 5: If they are identical, the client block is connected to the master block.
Step 1: A new client node attempts to connect to the master node, and the client node creates a block. The client node sends its own information and the created block to all the connected mobile devices in the SAMS.
Step 3: All the connected mobile devices in the SAMS authenticate the block received as a new client.
Step 4: If 51% of all the connected mobile devices in the SAMS authenticate it, and the number of such mobile devices is at least three, the block is connected.
Step 5: When a new client is added, Steps 1 to 4 are repeated.
User interface (for interacting with users)
Master manager (to work as the master node)
Client manager (to work as the client node)
Event handler (to process resources in order to monitor the resource state of the client node, master node, and blockchain and deliver the resources to the activity)
Activity (to provide the MRM operation status information in the SAMS to the users).
Set (for setting the resource permission information with client information)
ID (for entering the IP to access the master node)
Port (for entering the port)
Connect (for attempting to connect to the master code)
Stop (for disconnection).
Set (for setting the maximum number of clients accepted in the MRM infrastructure)
Port (for setting the port through which the client will gain access)
Start (for activating the master server)
Stop (for releasing the master server).
Server enabler (for activating the server of the master node)
Device management (for managing the connected client nodes)
Resource clustering (RC) Management (for hierarchical management of the resources of the client node)
Task management (for managing the overall tasks)
Task scheduler (for allocating tasks to clients)
Client heartbeat (CH) Checker (for identifying the operation status of the client node)
Client (C) fault tolerance (for responding to the failure state of the client node detected by the CH Checker).
RC management performs find adjacent client (FAC), which finds an adjacent client node from a random cluster. The client node found through the FAC is added to the cluster list (CL). When the performance of the FAC has been completed for every client node, cluster move to the new center point based on the client node added to each cluster through the Update Center Point UCP). Then cluster move to the optimal center point by repeatedly performing FAC, and the need for additional performance of FAC is determined through the check clustering availability (CCA). If no further performance is required based on the CCA, the client closest to the center point is selected as the center cluster. Furthermore, when a client is added, Blockchain Management creates a block using the corresponding client information and sends it to the connected clients, and the connected clients connect the block if the block is valid. These blocks are continuously created and connected even when the client requests computing and storage resources. Blockchain Management consists of create block (CB) for creating a block, create nonce (CN) for creating a nonce, Hash-set for setting the hash function when the information is hashed, blockchain check (BCC) for sending the created block to each client and authenticating it, and block mobile list (BML), to which clients that have been found to be malicious are added. If a block is found to be reliable by the BCC authentication, it is connected by being added to the blockchain list (BCL).
Master connecter (for connecting a client node to the master node)
Resource analyzer (for analyzing the resource status of the client node)
Task management (for allocating tasks from the master node and handling them)
Master heartbeat (MH) Checker (for checking the operation status of the master node)
M-Fault tolerance (for detecting and coping with the failure of the master node)
Task requester (for requesting computing service from the master node).
Furthermore, the blockchain Management plays the same role as that of the master node; that is, it verifies the integrity of the block using the client information sent from the master node when a client is added to the master node.
Create block (CB) (for creating a block)
Create nonce (CN) (for creating a nonce)
Hash-set (for setting the hash function when the information is hashed)
Blockchain check (BCC) (for sending the created block to each client and authenticating it)
Block mobile list (BML), to which clients that have been found to be malicious are added.
If a block is found to be reliable by the BCC authentication, it is connected by being added to the blockchain list (BCL). In the case of Hash-set, the same hash function as the one in the master node must be set so that the same value can be obtained. The default hash function is SHA-2, and it can be changed to SHA-1 depending on the user setting.
Event handler sends information to the Activity to visualize the manual control of the user, the performance process, and the result through the Client Manager and Master Manager.
Connection activity (for connecting the user to the master node and client node)
Mobile device information (MDI) Activity (for visualizing the integrated resources of the mobile device and the blockchain status)
Set activity (for setting the master node and the client node from the user)
Mobile resource (MR) graph activity (for visualizing the mobile resource status as a graph)
Dynamic mobile resource information (DMRI) Activity (for visualizing the dynamic changes of the mobile resources).
Various types of authentication in the SAMS
Client node does not create a block with its own information
The client node cannot connect to the blockchain because it attempts to receive authentication by sending its own information and block to all the connected mobile devices
Client node attempts to change an already connected block
Even if one client node changes all of its blockchain, it takes a long time to change the blockchain stored in the other mobile devices
Client node falsifies its own data and spreads it
The connection is impossible because the authentication conditions (at least three of all mobile devices connected in the SAMS and at least 51% of all mobile devices) have not been met
In this research, the SAMS was proposed for authenticating mobile devices using a blockchain in order to trust the resource information of the mobile devices in the MRM resource pool. The SAMS creates blocks based on the hash value of the master node in the MRM and the hash value of the resource information in the subordinate client node, and it forms blockchain by creating and connecting hash values and blocks when client nodes are added. To evaluate the performance of the SAMS, it was applied to the MRM and the connection of unauthorized devices was artificially attempted. The results confirmed that unauthorized devices cannot access and falsify data in the SAMS.
In the future, we aim to minimize the data size of blocks generated in the MRM with block chain based SAMS.
All the authors contributed equally to this work. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1A09000631).
The authors declare that they have no competing interets.
Availability of data and materials
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
- Jeong YS, Kim HW, Jang HJ (2013) Adaptive resource management scheme for monitoring of CPS. J Supercomput 66(1):57–69View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gil JM, Park JH, Jeong YS (2013) Data center selection based on neuro-fuzzy inference systems in cloud computing environments. J Supercomput 66(3):1194–1214View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sonkar SK, Kharat MU (2015) A survey on resource management in cloud computing environment. Int J Adv Trends Comput Sci Eng 4(4):48–51Google Scholar
- Kumar K, Lu YH (2010) Cloud computing for mobile users: can offloading computation save energy. IEEE Comput 43:51–56View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sun Z, Fox G, Gu W, Li Z (2014) A parallel clustering method combined information bottleneck theory and centroid-based clustering. J Supercomput 69(1):452–467View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kim HW, Byun H, Song EH, Jeong YS. Sustainable operation algorithm for high availability with integrated desktop storage based on virtualization. In: Proceedings of the 2015 international symposium on real-time natural user interface and natural user experience, Hanoi, Vietnam, 18–20; 2015, pp 123–128Google Scholar
- Degefa FB, Won D (2013) Extended key management scheme for dynamic group in multi-cast communication. J Converg 4(4):7–13Google Scholar
- Malkawi MI (2013) The art of software systems development: reliability, availability, maintainability, performance (RAMP). Humancentric Comput Inf Sci 3(22):1–17Google Scholar
- Kim Hyun-Woo, Park JH, Majigsuren D, Jeong YS (2015) Efficient sustainable operation mechanism of distributed desktop integration storage based on virtualization with ubiquitous computing. Sustainability 7(6):7568–7580View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Song EH, Kim HW, Jeong YS (2012) Visual monitoring system of multi-hosts behavior for trustworthiness with mobile cloud. J Inf Process Syst 8(2):347–358View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lee SH, Lee IY (2013) A secure index management scheme for providing data sharing in cloud storage. J Inf Process Syst 9(2):287–300View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shrivastava N, Kumar G (2013) A survey on cost effective multi-cloud storage in cloud computing. Int J Adv Res Comput Eng Technol 2(4):1405Google Scholar
- Peck M (2016) A block chain currency that beats bitcoin on privacy. IEEE Spectr 53(12):11–13View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Christidis K, Devetsikiotis M (2016) Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things. IEEE Access 4:2292–2303View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kim SY, Roh HC, Park CH, Park SH. Analysis of metadata server on clustered file systems. In: Proceedings of the Korea computer congress 2009, KCC, vol 36, No. 1, Seoul, Korea, 1–3; 2009, pp 64–69Google Scholar
- Gaonkar PE, Bojewar S, Das JA (2013) A survey: data storage technologies. Int J Eng Sci Innov Technol 2(2):547–554Google Scholar
- Gibson GA, Van Meter R (2000) Network attached storage architecture. Commun ACM 43(11):37–45View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dong B, Zheng Q, Tian F, Chao K, Ma R, Anane R (2012) An optimized approach for storing and accessing small files on cloud storage. J Netw Comput Appl 35(6):1847–1862View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chattopadhyay M, Dan P, Mazumdar S (2014) Comparison of visualization of optimal clustering using self-organizing map and growing hierarchical self-organizing map in cellular manufacturing system. Appl Soft Comput 22:528–543View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Silva JS, Campos JC, Harrison MD (2014) Prototyping and analysing ubiquitous computing environments using multiple layers. Int J HumanComput Stud 72(5):488–506View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Park JH, Kim HW, Jeong YS (2014) Efficiency sustainability resource visual simulator for clustered desktop virtualization based on cloud infrastructure. Sustainability 6:8079–8091View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nayak A, Bansode R (2016) Analysis of knowledge based authentication system using persuasive cued click points. Proc Comput Sci 79:553–560View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Riesen K, Hanne T, Schmidt R (2016) Sketch-based user authentication with a novel string edit distance model. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst PP(99):1–13Google Scholar
- Kim HW, Park JH, Jeong YS (2016) Human-centric stroage resource mechanism for big data on cloud service architecture. J Supercomput 72(7):2437–2452View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Duan H, Yu S, Mei M, Zhan W, Li L (2015) CSTORE: a desktop-oriented distributed public cloud storage system. Comput Elect Eng 42:60–73View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shafer J, Rixner S, Cox AL. The hadoop distributed filesystem: balancing portability and performance. In: Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on performance analysis of system and software (ISPASS 2010), White Plains, New York, 28–30; 2010, pp 122–133Google Scholar
- Vasilyev NP, Rovnyagin MM (2014) Hybrid clusters for budget supercomputers and cloud computing. Autom Remote Control 75(10):1869–1874View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Heo YA. A study on mobile resource management scheme based on collaborative architecture. Master Degree Thesis, Dongguk University; 2017Google Scholar
- Kar J, Mishra MR (2016) Mitigating threats and security metrics in cloud computing. J Inf Process Syst 12(2):226–233Google Scholar
- Motavaselalhagh F, Esfahani FS, Arabnia HR (2015) Knowledge-based adaptable scheduler for SaaS providers in cloud computing. Humancentric Comput Inf Sci 5(14):1–19Google Scholar
- Kim S, Lee H, Kwon H, Lee S (2015) Evaluation model of defense information systems use. J Converg 6(3):18–26Google Scholar
- Kang WM, Moon SY, Park JH (2017) An enhanced security framework for home appliances in smart home. Humancentric Comput Inf Sci 7(6):1–12Google Scholar
- Suryani V, Sulistyo S, Widyawan W (2017) Internet of things (IoT) framework for granting trust among objects. J Inf Process Syst 13(6):1613–1627Google Scholar