PROTECTING LOCATION PRIVACY

FOR TASK ALLOCATION IN AD HOC

MOBILE CLOUD COMPUTING

GUIDE NAME
R.LAKSHMI MSC.,M.PHIL.,B.ED.,
ABSTRACT
 Mobile cloud computing is an emerging cloud computing
paradigm that integrates cloud computing and mobile
computing to enable many useful mobile applications.
 However, the large-scale deployment of mobile cloud
computing is hindered by the concerns on possible privacy
leakage.
 In this project, we investigate the privacy issues in the ad
hoc mobile cloud computing, and propose a framework
that can protect the location privacy when allocating tasks
to mobile devices.
 Our mechanism is based on differential privacy and
geocast, and allows mobile devices to contribute their
resources to the ad hoc mobile cloud without leaking their
location information.
 INTRODUCTION
 Mobile cloud computing refers to an where both the data
storage and data processing happen outside of the mobile
device.
 Mobile cloud applications move the computing power and
data storage away from the mobile devices and into
powerful and centralized computing platforms located in
clouds, which are then accessed over the wireless
connection based on a thin native client.
MOBILE CLOUD COMPUTING
Location
privacy
EXISTING SYSTEM

 A mechanism to calculate location that balances

location privacy and the need for high quality
location-based service.
 With the mechanism, the location-based service
provider only learns minimum information to provide
service of required quality.
 The private information is no longer part of a
location-based query, but the result of a location-
based query regarding the task.
Drawbacks in Existing System

 There is Privacy-preserving framework for

task allocation.
 Some mobile servers may drop the task when
they are performing and leave the main server.
PROPOSED SYSTEM

 In the proposed system, the system proposes a framework

that provides solutions to the above challenges, where
both location privacy and service quality are considered.
 In our framework, the CCP only has access to sanitized
location data of mobile servers according to differential
privacy (DP).
 Since every mobile server is subscribed to a cellular
service provider (CSP) with which it already has a trust
relationship, the CSP can integrate mobile server location
and reputation information, and provides the data to the
CCP in noisy form according to DP.
PROPOSED SYSTEM
ARCHITECTURE
ADVANTAGES

 Constructing Reputation-Based Private Spatial

Decomposition which is very fast in Task Allocation.
 Acceptance rate of task allocation is near to 100%.
 The number of notified mobile servers always is small
which will yields to high speed in finding data.
 The aggregate result of participating mobile servers is
very trustworthy.
WHY MOBILE CLOUD COMPUTING?

 Mobile devices face many resource challenges (battery

life, storage, bandwidth etc.)
•Cloud computing offers advantages to users by allowing
them to use infrastructure, platforms and software by
cloud providers at low cost and elastically in an on-
demand fashion.
•Mobile cloud computing provides mobile users with data
storage and processing services in clouds, obviating the
need to have a powerful device configuration (e.g. CPU
speed, memory capacity etc), as all resource-intensive
computing can be performed in the cloud.
 Service providers can share the resources and costs to
support a variety of applications and large no. of users.
• Ease of Integration
• Multi-tenancy.
• Multiple services from different providers can be
integrated easily through the cloud and the Internet to
meet the users’ demands.
APPLICATIONS

 Mobile Commerce: M-commerce allows business models

for commerce using mobile devices.
 Mobile Healthcare: M-healthcare is to minimize the
limitations of traditional medical treatment .
 Mobile Gaming: M-game is a high potential market
generating revenues for service providers.
SYSTEM SPECIFICATION
Hardware Requirements:
 System : Pentium IV 3.5 GHz.
 Hard Disk : 40 GB.
 Monitor : 14’ Colour Monitor.
 Mouse : Optical Mouse.
 Ram : 1 GB.

Software Requirements:
 Operating system : Windows XP or Windows 7, Windows 8.
 Coding Language : Java – AWT,Swings,Networking
 Data Base : My Sql / MS Access.
 Documentation : MS Office
 IDE : Eclipse Galileo
 Development Kit : JDK 1.6
MODULES

 PROVERS
 WITNESS
 LOCATION PROOF SERVER
 CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY
 VERIFIER
 THREAT MODEL
 MODULE DESCRIPTION
Provers
 The node who needs to collect location proofs from its
neighboring nodes.
 When a location proof is needed at time t, the provers
will broadcast a location proof request to its neighboring
nodes through Bluetooth.
 If no positive response is received, the provers will
generate a dummy location proof and submit it to the
location proof server.
 WITNESS:
 Once a neighboring node agrees to provide location proof for the provers, this
node becomes a witness of the provers.
 The witness node will generate a location proof and send it back to the provers.

LOCATION PROOF SERVER:

 A location proof server is necessary for storing the history records of the
location proofs.
 It communicates directly with the prover nodes who submit their
location proofs.
 A location proof server is un trusted in the sense that even though it
is compromised and monitored by attackers, it is impossible for the
attacker to reveal the real source of the location proof.
 CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY
 A Certificate Authority commonly used in many networks, we consider an online
CA which is run by an independent trusted third party.
 Every mobile node registers with the CA and pre-loads a set of public/private key
pairs before entering the network.
 CA is the only party who knows the mapping between the real identity and
pseudonyms (public keys), and works as a bridge between the verifier and the
location proof server.
 It can retrieve location proof from the server and forward it to the verifier.
 VERIFIER:
 A third-party user or an application that is authorized to verify a prover’s
location within a specific time period.
 The verifier usually has close relationship with the prover, e.g., friends or
colleagues, to be trusted enough to gain authorization.
THREAT MODEL
 It aims to track the location of a mobile node. An adversary can
have the same credential as a mobile node and is equipped to
eavesdrop communications.
 We assume that the adversary is internal, passive, and global.
 In the worst case, the adversary could compromise the location
proof server to get the stored location proof records.
 it is not able to take control of the server to work as a colluder,
since once compromised, the attack will be detected promptly
and the location proof server will be replaced by a back-up server.
THANK YOU