Next Article in Journal
Scalable Lightweight IoT-Based Smart Weather Measurement System
Next Article in Special Issue
Maximizing Efficiency in Energy Trading Operations through IoT-Integrated Digital Twins
Previous Article in Journal
Ensemble-Learning Framework for Intrusion Detection to Enhance Internet of Things’ Devices Security
Previous Article in Special Issue
Widening Blockchain Technology toward Access Control for Service Provisioning in Cellular Networks
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Correction

Correction: Witanto et al. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623

by
Elizabeth Nathania Witanto
,
Brian Stanley
and
Sang-Gon Lee
*
College of Software Convergence, Dongseo University, Busan 47011, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2023, 23(12), 5566; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125566
Submission received: 10 May 2023 / Accepted: 22 May 2023 / Published: 14 June 2023
The authors make the following corrections to the published paper [1].
The errors appeared in the text because of the explanation in the following.
The original Equation (7):
e ( δ k , ω k ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) P + P p u b ) , i I r i S i g n i ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) P , i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) 1 P ) = e ( P , P ) i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) · i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) 1 = e ( P , P )
is complex; thus, the authors made a mistake. The authors misunderstood that the exponential on the 3rd line could be canceled. Then, the authors discovered that the 3rd line of Equation (7) could not be canceled because the authors used a summation. Therefore, the authors have changed it to multiplication instead.
However, this mistake affects Equations (3), (4), (6), (8), and (9), which are strongly related to Equation (7). It also affects explanations in other paragraphs related to computational cost and experiments using our equations. The details of the changes are written in the following.
Changes to Section 5. Proposed Scheme
In Equation (3),
δ k = i I r i ( H ( m i ) P + P p u b )
should be changed to
δ k = i I r i ( H ( m i ) P + P p u b )
In Equation (4),
ω k = i I r i S i g n i
should be changed to
ω k = i I S i g n i r i 1
In Equation (6),
e ( k K δ k , k K ω k ) = e ( P , P )
should be changed to
e ( k K δ k , k K ω k ) = e ( P , P )
Changes to Section 6.1. Correctness
In Equation (7),
e ( δ k , ω k ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) P + P p u b ) , i I r i S i g n i ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) P , i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) 1 P ) = e ( P , P ) i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) · i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) 1 = e ( P , P )
should be changed to
e ( δ k , ω k ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) P + P p u b ) , i I S i g n i r i 1 ) = e ( i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) P , i I ( r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) ) 1 P ) = e ( P , P ) i I r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) · i I ( r i ( H ( m i ) + x ) ) 1 = e ( P , P )
In Equation (8),
e ( k K δ k , k K ω k ) = e ( k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) P + P p u b ) , k K i I r k i S i g n k i ) = e ( k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) P , k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) 1 P ) = e ( P , P ) k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) · k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) 1 = e ( P , P )
should be changed to
e ( k K δ k , k K ω k ) = e ( k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) P + P p u b ) , k K i I S i g n k i r k i 1 ) = e ( k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) P , k K i I ( r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) ) 1 P ) = e ( P , P ) k K i I r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) · k K i I ( r k i ( H ( m k i ) + x ) ) 1 = e ( P , P )
Changes to Section 6.2. Unforgeability
In Equation (9),
δ = i I , i j r i H ( m i ) P + r j H ( m b ) P
should be changed to
δ = i I , i j r i H ( m i ) P + r j H ( m b ) P
Changes to Section 7.1. Computation Cost
In paragraph 1, the sentence "The cost of the CSP is ( c × ( 2 M u l + A d d + H a s h ) ) + S I G N + 2 V E R with the bracket showing the cost for generating proof δ , while the cost of the verifier is ( ( c × M u l ) + ( c × P ) ) + 2 S I G N + 2 V E R with the bracket showing the cost for generating proof ω and bilinear pairing of proofs δ , ω in the verification process. The last is the cost of CO, ( ( t × A d d ) + P ) + 3 S I G N + 3 V E R with the bracket showing the cost for the batch verification process." should be changed to:
“The cost of the CSP is ( c × ( 3 M u l + A d d + H a s h ) ) + S I G N + 2 V E R with the bracket showing the cost for generating proof δ , while the cost of the verifier is ( ( c × M u l × I n v ) + ( c × P ) ) + 2 S I G N + 2 V E R with the bracket showing the cost for generating proof ω and bilinear pairing of proofs δ , ω in the verification process. The last is the cost of CO, ( ( t × M u l ) + P ) + 3 S I G N + 3 V E R , with the bracket showing the cost for the batch verification process.”
Table 2 “Computation costs of each actor” was shown in the text as:
Table 2. Computation costs of each actor.
Table 2. Computation costs of each actor.
ActorComputation Cost
User ( n × ( I n v + A d d + M u l + H a s h ) ) + 2 S I G N + V E R
CSP ( c × ( 2 M u l + A d d + H a s h ) ) + S I G N + 2 V E R
Verifier ( ( c × M u l ) + ( c × P ) ) + 2 S I G N + 2 V E R
CO ( ( t × A d d ) + P ) + 3 S I G N + 3 V E R
c = n / a , I n v = inverse, A d d = addition, M u l = multiplication, P = bilinear pairing, S I G N = digital signature, V E R = verification of digital signature.
It should be changed to
Table 2. Computation costs of each actor.
Table 2. Computation costs of each actor.
ActorComputation Cost
User ( n × ( I n v + A d d + M u l + H a s h ) ) + 2 S I G N + V E R
CSP ( c × ( 3 M u l + A d d + H a s h ) ) + S I G N + 2 V E R
Verifier ( ( c × M u l × I n v ) + ( c × P ) ) + 2 S I G N + 2 V E R
CO ( ( t × M u l ) + P ) + 3 S I G N + 3 V E R
c = n / a , I n v = inverse, A d d = addition, M u l = multiplication, P = bilinear pairing, S I G N = digital signature, and V E R = verification of digital signature.
Changes to Section 7.3. Experiment Results
In paragraph 1, the sentence “CSP reaches time 5.6 s for generating proof δ of 2000 data blocks and the user 2.6 s for generating ZSS signature of the same amount of data blocks. CSP needs a longer time because as shown in Equation (3), it needs two multiplication operations. Different from the user that only needs one multiplication operation in Equation (2).” should be changed to:
“The CSP reaches time 5.3 s for generating proof δ of 2000 data blocks and the user 2.6 s for generating the ZSS signature of the same amount of data blocks. The CSP needs a longer time because, as shown in Equation (3), it needs three multiplication operations. Different from the user that only needs one multiplication and one inverse operation in Equation (2).”
In the original article, due to the correction to Equation (3), a change is required to Figure 5. The corrected Figure 5 appears below.
In paragraph 3, the sentence “It needs 10 s to verify 2000 data blocks. However, the case of multi-verifiers (5, 10, 15, and 20 verifiers) reduces the time consumption significantly with results of 1.9 s, 1 s, 0.6 s, and 0.5 s, respectively, for the same amount of data blocks.” should be changed to:
“It needs 7.3 s to verify 2000 data blocks. However, the case of multi-verifiers (5, 10, 15, and 20 verifiers) significantly reduces the time consumption with results of 1.5 s, 0.7 s, 0.5 s, and 0.4 s, respectively, for the same amount of data blocks.”
In the original article, due to the correction to Equation (4), a change is required to Figure 6. The corrected Figure 6 appears below.
The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. The original article has been updated.

Reference

  1. Witanto, E.N.; Stanley, B.; Lee, S.G. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 5. Generation time of Signature and Proof Delta.
Figure 5. Generation time of Signature and Proof Delta.
Sensors 23 05566 g005
Figure 6. Comparison of verification time using multi-verifiers.
Figure 6. Comparison of verification time using multi-verifiers.
Sensors 23 05566 g006
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Witanto, E.N.; Stanley, B.; Lee, S.-G. Correction: Witanto et al. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623. Sensors 2023, 23, 5566. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125566

AMA Style

Witanto EN, Stanley B, Lee S-G. Correction: Witanto et al. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623. Sensors. 2023; 23(12):5566. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125566

Chicago/Turabian Style

Witanto, Elizabeth Nathania, Brian Stanley, and Sang-Gon Lee. 2023. "Correction: Witanto et al. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623" Sensors 23, no. 12: 5566. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125566

APA Style

Witanto, E. N., Stanley, B., & Lee, S. -G. (2023). Correction: Witanto et al. Distributed Data Integrity Verification Scheme in Multi-Cloud Environment. Sensors 2023, 23, 1623. Sensors, 23(12), 5566. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125566

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop