Browse Source

Add possible solution of a hybrid P2P network

Carsten Porth 5 years ago
parent
commit
e1e7140add
1 changed files with 28 additions and 8 deletions
  1. 28 8
      thesis/content/04-concept/solution-strategy-architecture.tex

+ 28 - 8
thesis/content/04-concept/solution-strategy-architecture.tex

@@ -1,20 +1,22 @@
-Various models can be used to implement a secure data exchange between the users of an \ac{OSN} via an add-on. The solution strategies shown below differ primarily in the question of where data is stored and how it can be found.
+Various models can be used to implement a secure data exchange between the users of an \ac{OSN} via additional network. The solution strategies shown below differ primarily in the question of where data is stored and how it can be found.
 
 \begin{figure}[h!]
 	\centering
 	\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{solution-strategy-architecture}
-	\caption{Different architectures: a) Use of a central server to which all hybrid \ac{OSN} users connect to, b) Creation of a P2P network among the users for data exchange.}
+	\caption{Architectures for secure data exchange among users: (a) by the use of an additional server, (b) via a P2P network connecting all users or (c) via a hybrid P2P network with servers acting as super-peers}
 	\label{fig:solution-strategy-architecture}
 \end{figure}
 
-One possibility is to use an extra infrastructure to store the data, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:solution-strategy-architecture}.a. Additional servers are used to store and distribute the private data to be protected. Using additional servers has the advantage that the data is always available and there are no dependencies to other hybrid \ac{OSN} users. Furthermore, resources must only be available centrally and not locally for every user. At the central location, the data can be indexed and explicitly queried. However, the operation and maintenance of one or more such servers are problematic. In principle, the question of the operators must be clarified, because the infrastructure must function reliably. An architecture based on this proposal was used by FaceCloak.
+One possibility is to use an extra infrastructure to store the data, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:solution-strategy-architecture}.a. An additional server stores and distributes the private data to be protected. Using a server has the advantage that the data are always available and there are no dependencies to other hybrid \ac{OSN} users. Furthermore, resources only have to be available centrally and not locally on the user's device. At the central location, the data can be indexed and explicitly queried. However, the operation and maintenance of one or more servers are problematic. In principle, the question for the service provider has to be clarified, because the reliability of the infrastructure is essential. FaceCloak (see Chapter \ref{sec:facecloak}) used an architecture based on this structure.
 
-In contrast, a decentralized or distributed solution strategy would create a network among users of the hybrid application. This strategy is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:solution-strategy-architecture}.b. No extra infrastructure would have to be operated. The users would then have a typical peer role. With this model, solutions must be found for how data is always available and can be found, even if a user is temporarily or permanently offline.
-Furthermore, the resources on the end devices are limited, so that effective, economical solutions are needed. Another challenge is the addressing of peers. Since they typically do not have a static \ac{IP} address, but the \ac{IP} address changes frequently, solutions must be found for accessibility. Since there is no central, global index, finding data is even more difficult.
+Instead of operating a separate, additional server, it would also be possible to use a third-party, existing infrastructure. These include, for example, blockchains or \ac{P2P} file-sharing networks that could be used for data exchange. Since no influence can be exerted on existing infrastructure, its use entails further restrictions and potential risks.
 
-An interim solution is also conceivable, in which an existing infrastructure, e.g., an already existing \ac{P2P} network or the blockchain, is used for storing and exchanging data. Since no influence can be exerted on existing infrastructure, its use entails further restrictions and potential risks.
+A decentralized solution strategy would create a network among users of the hybrid application (see Figure \ref{fig:solution-strategy-architecture}.b). No extra infrastructure would have to be operated. The users would then have a typical peer role. By using this model, it is difficult to keep data available and accessible even if the user is permanently or temporarily offline. The problem needs to be solved.
+Furthermore, the resources on the devices are limited, so that effective and economical solutions are needed. Another challenge is the addressing of peers. Since they typically do not have a static \ac{IP} address, solutions have to be found for accessibility. Since there is no central, global index, finding data is even more difficult.
 
-Table \ref{tab:solution-strategy-architecture-comparison} lists the advantages and disadvantages of the different strategies.
+Adding servers to the \ac{P2P} network would create a hybrid solution (see Figure X). In this model, the servers would take on the role of a super peer, permanently reachable at a fixed address, thus stabilizing the \ac{P2P} network. The problem of data availability could be limited by storing much of the data at super peers. The problem of addressing would also be solved by establishing connections to other peers via the known super peers. However, the problem would remain with the cost and maintenance of the servers.
+
+Table \ref{tab:solution-strategy-architecture-comparison} lists the advantages and disadvantages of the different strategies for the hybrid \ac{OSN} architecture.
 
 % Own infrastructure
 \newcommand{\advantageoi}{\begin{minipage} [t] {0.3\textwidth} 
@@ -52,6 +54,23 @@ Table \ref{tab:solution-strategy-architecture-comparison} lists the advantages a
 		\hspace{1mm}
 \end{minipage}}
 
+% Hybrid solution
+\newcommand{\advantagehn}{\begin{minipage} [t] {0.3\textwidth} 
+		\begin{itemize}
+			\item Availability of data
+			\item Peer discovery
+		\end{itemize}
+\end{minipage}}
+
+\newcommand{\disadvantagehn}{\begin{minipage} [t] {0.3\textwidth} 
+		\begin{itemize}
+			\item Expenses
+			\item Who operates the infrastructure?
+			\item Finding the data
+		\end{itemize}
+		\hspace{1mm}
+\end{minipage}}
+
 % External infrastructure
 \newcommand{\advantageei}{\begin{minipage} [t] {0.3\textwidth} 
 		\begin{itemize}
@@ -75,7 +94,8 @@ Table \ref{tab:solution-strategy-architecture-comparison} lists the advantages a
 		\cline{2-3}
 		& \textbf{Advantages} & \textbf{Disadvantages} \\ \hline
 		\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Own infrastructure\\ (centralized)\end{tabular}}}        & \advantageoi                    & \disadvantageoi                       \\ \hline
-		\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Own network\\ (decentralized/distributed)\end{tabular}}} & \advantageon                    & \disadvantageon                       \\ \hline
+		\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}P2P network\\ (decentralized)\end{tabular}}}             & \advantageon                    & \disadvantageon                       \\ \hline
+		\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Hybrid P2P network\\ (decentralized)\end{tabular}}}      & \advantagehn                    & \disadvantagehn                       \\ \hline
 		\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\textbf{External infrastructure}}                                                           & \advantageei                    & \disadvantageei                       \\ \hline
 	\end{tabularx}
 	\caption{Advantages and disadvantages of the different solution strategies for the hybrid \ac{OSN} architecture.}