Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Christian Priebe

dblp:161/6100 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0002-8342-1048ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 1 since 2021Security and privacy · 3 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Network and information security
7 papers
Hardware security and side channels · 42% Privacy and data protection · 29% Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 21%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Database system architecture and tuning · 77% Transaction processing and concurrency control · 23%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Operating systems · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Hardware security and side channels
trusted execution environments
1.752021
rkt-io: a direct I/O stack for shielded execution · EuroSys 2021
EnclaveDB: A Secure Database Using SGX · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2018
LibSEAL: revealing service integrity violations using trusted execution · EuroSys 2018
Privacy and data protection › privacy analysis › privacy models
central differential privacy
0.812024
Samplable Anonymous Aggregation for Private Federated Data Analysis · CCS 2024
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy
local differential privacy
0.812024
Samplable Anonymous Aggregation for Private Federated Data Analysis · CCS 2024
Hardware security and side channels › trusted execution environments
Intel SGX
0.522017
Glamdring: Automatic Application Partitioning for Intel SGX · USENIX ATC 2017
SCONE: Secure Linux Containers with Intel SGX · OSDI 2016
Authentication and access control › access control policy
access control policy enforcement
0.212015
FlowWatcher: Defending against Data Disclosure Vulnerabilities in Web Applications · CCS 2015
Web and mobile security
web application security
0.212015
FlowWatcher: Defending against Data Disclosure Vulnerabilities in Web Applications · CCS 2015
Operating systems › i/o › i/o subsystem
i/o stack
0.112021
rkt-io: a direct I/O stack for shielded execution · EuroSys 2021
Cloud and datacenter computing › datacenter services
online service systems
0.112018
LibSEAL: revealing service integrity violations using trusted execution · EuroSys 2018
Operating systems › virtualization
containers
0.112016
SCONE: Secure Linux Containers with Intel SGX · OSDI 2016

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

trusted execution environment · 1.0direct i/o · 1.0secure aggregation · 0.8cryptographic primitives · 0.8trusted hardware · 0.7cryptographic integrity protocol · 0.7HTTP traffic observation · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Samplable Anonymous Aggregation for Private Federated Data Analysis
abstract
We revisit the problem of designing scalable protocols for private statistics and private federated learning when each device holds its private data. Locally differentially private algorithms require little trust but are (provably) limited in their utility. Centrally differentially private algorithms can allow significantly better utility but require a trusted curator. This gap has led to significant interest in the design and implementation of simple cryptographic primitives, that can allow central-like utility guarantees without having to trust a central server.
Kunal Talwar, Shan Wang 0020, Audra McMillan, Vitaly Feldman, Pansy Bansal, Bailey Basile, Áine Cahill, Yi Sheng Chan, Mike Chatzidakis, Junye Chen, Oliver R. A. Chick, Mona Chitnis, Suman Ganta, Yusuf Goren, Filip Granqvist, Kristine Guo, Frederic Jacobs, Omid Javidbakht, Albert Liu, Richard Low, Dan Mascenik, Steve Myers, David Park, Wonhee Park, Gianni Parsa, Tommy Pauly, Christian Priebe, Rehan Rishi, Guy N. Rothblum, Congzheng Song, Linmao Song, Karl Tarbe, Sebastian Vogt 0003, Shundong Zhou, Vojta Jina, Michael Scaria, Luke Winstrom
CCS27
2021 rkt-io: a direct I/O stack for shielded execution
abstract
The shielding of applications using trusted execution environments (TEEs) can provide strong security guarantees in untrusted cloud environments. When executing I/O operations, today's shielded execution frameworks, however, exhibit performance and security limitations: they assign resources to the I/O path inefficiently, perform redundant data copies, use untrusted host I/O stacks with security risks and performance overheads. This prevents TEEs from running modern I/O-intensive applications that require high-performance networking and storage.
Jörg Thalheim, Harshavardhan Unnibhavi, Christian Priebe, Pramod Bhatotia, Peter R. Pietzuch
EuroSys3
2018 LibSEAL: revealing service integrity violations using trusted execution
abstract
Users of online services such as messaging, code hosting and collaborative document editing expect the services to uphold the integrity of their data. Despite providers' best efforts, data corruption still occurs, but at present service integrity violations are excluded from SLAs. For providers to include such violations as part of SLAs, the competing requirements of clients and providers must be satisfied. Clients need the ability to independently identify and prove service integrity violations to claim compensation. At the same time, providers must be able to refute spurious claims.
Pierre-Louis Aublin, Florian Kelbert, Dan O'Keeffe, Divya Muthukumaran, Christian Priebe, Joshua Lind, Robert Krahn, Christof Fetzer, David M. Eyers, Peter R. Pietzuch
EuroSys5
2018 EnclaveDB: A Secure Database Using SGX
abstract
We propose EnclaveDB, a database engine that guarantees confidentiality, integrity, and freshness for data and queries. EnclaveDB guarantees these properties even when the database administrator is malicious, when an attacker has compromised the operating system or the hypervisor, and when the database runs in an untrusted host in the cloud. EnclaveDB achieves this by placing sensitive data (tables, indexes and other metadata) in enclaves protected by trusted hardware (such as Intel SGX). EnclaveDB has a small trusted computing base, which includes an in-memory storage and query engine, a transaction manager and pre-compiled stored procedures. A key component of EnclaveDB is an efficient protocol for checking integrity and freshness of the database log. The protocol supports concurrent, asynchronous appends and truncation, and requires minimal synchronization between threads. Our experiments using standard database benchmarks and a performance model that simulates large enclaves show that EnclaveDB achieves strong security with low overhead (up to 40% for TPC-C) compared to an industry strength in-memory database engine.
Christian Priebe, Kapil Vaswani, Manuel Costa
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy1
2017 Glamdring: Automatic Application Partitioning for Intel SGX
Joshua Lind, Christian Priebe, Divya Muthukumaran, Dan O'Keeffe, Pierre-Louis Aublin, Florian Kelbert, Tobias Reiher, David Goltzsche, David M. Eyers, Rüdiger Kapitza, Christof Fetzer, Peter R. Pietzuch
USENIX ATC2
2016 SCONE: Secure Linux Containers with Intel SGX
Sergei Arnautov, Bohdan Trach, Franz Gregor, Thomas Knauth, André Martin, Christian Priebe, Joshua Lind, Divya Muthukumaran, Dan O'Keeffe, Mark Stillwell, David Goltzsche, David M. Eyers, Rüdiger Kapitza, Peter R. Pietzuch, Christof Fetzer
OSDI6
2015 FlowWatcher: Defending against Data Disclosure Vulnerabilities in Web Applications
abstract
Bugs in the authorisation logic of web applications can expose the data of one user to another. Such data disclosure vulnerabilities are common---they can be caused by a single omitted access control check in the application. We make the observation that, while the implementation of the authorisation logic is complex and therefore error-prone, most web applications only use simple access control models, in which each piece of data is accessible by a user or a group of users. This makes it possible to validate the correct operation of the authorisation logic externally, based on the observed data in HTTP traffic to and from an application.
Divya Muthukumaran, Dan O'Keeffe, Christian Priebe, David M. Eyers, Brian Shand, Peter R. Pietzuch
CCS3