Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Enis Ceyhun Alp
dblp:204/3353
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author
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
2 papers |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 40% Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 40% Privacy and data protection · 20% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers |
Data mining · 58% Data integration and cleaning · 33% Information retrieval · 9% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Distributed systems · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure multiparty computation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | CALYPSO: Private Data Management for Decentralized Ledgers · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020 |
Distributed systems › distributed database
distributed ledger |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | CALYPSO: Private Data Management for Decentralized Ledgers · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020 |
Distributed systems › blockchain
permissionless blockchain |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | CALYPSO: Private Data Management for Decentralized Ledgers · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020 |
Data integration and cleaning
entity resolution |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Device Graphing by Example · KDD 2018 |
Data mining › structured data mining › graph mining
community detection |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Internet Device Graphs · KDD 2017 |
Data mining › structured data mining
graph mining |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Internet Device Graphs · KDD 2017 |
Privacy and data protection › anonymity
traceable anonymity |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | CALYPSO: Private Data Management for Decentralized Ledgers · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020 |
Information retrieval
online advertising |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | Internet Device Graphs · KDD 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
community detection · 0.9secret sharing · 0.9incentive scheme · 0.9IP-colocation · 0.6unsupervised learning · 0.3bayesian similarity · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | CALYPSO: Private Data Management for Decentralized LedgersabstractDistributed ledgers provide high availability and integrity , making them a key enabler for practical and secure computation of distributed workloads among mutually distrustful parties. Many practical applications also require strong confidentiality , however. This work enhances permissioned and permissionless blockchains with the ability to manage confidential data without forfeiting availability or decentralization. The proposed Calypso architecture addresses two orthogonal challenges confronting modern distributed ledgers: (a) enabling the auditable management of secrets and (b) protecting distributed computations against arbitrage attacks when their results depend on the ordering and secrecy of inputs. Calypso introduces on-chain secrets, a novel abstraction that enforces atomic deposition of an auditable trace whenever users access confidential data. Calypso provides user-controlled consent management that ensures revocation atomicity and accountable anonymity. To enable permissionless deployment, we introduce an incentive scheme and provide users with the option to select their preferred trustees. We evaluated our Calypso prototype with a confidential document-sharing application and a decentralized lottery. Our benchmarks show that transaction-processing latency increases linearly in terms of security (number of trustees) and is in the range of 0.2 to 8 seconds for 16 to 128 trustees. Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias, Enis Ceyhun Alp, Linus Gasser, Philipp Jovanovic, Ewa Syta, Bryan Ford |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 2 |
| 2019 | Rethinking General-Purpose Decentralized ComputingabstractWhile showing great promise, smart contracts are difficult to program correctly, as they need a deep understanding of cryptography and distributed algorithms, and offer limited functionality, as they have to be deterministic and cannot operate on secret data. In this paper we present Protean, a general-purpose decentralized computing platform that addresses these limitations by moving from a monolithic execution model, where all participating nodes store all the state and execute every computation, to a modular execution-model. Protean employs secure specialized modules, called functional units, for building decentralized applications that are currently insecure or impossible to implement with smart contracts. Each functional unit is a distributed system that provides a special-purpose functionality by exposing atomic transactions to the smart-contract developer. Combining these transactions into arbitrarily-defined workflows, developers can build a larger class of decentralized applications, such as provably-secure and fair lotteries or e-voting. Enis Ceyhun Alp, Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias, Georgia Fragkouli, Bryan Ford |
HotOS | 1 |
| 2018 | Device Graphing by ExampleabstractDatasets that organize and associate the many identifiers produced by PCs, smartphones, and tablets accessing the internet are referred to as internet device graphs . In this paper, we demonstrate how measurement, tracking, and other internet entities can associate multiple identifiers with a single device or user after coarse associations, e.g ., based on IP-colocation , are made. We employ a Bayesian similarity algorithm that relies on examples of pairs of identifiers and their associated telemetry, including user agent, screen size, and domains visited, to establish pair-wise scores. Community detection algorithms are applied to group identifiers that belong to the same device or user. We train and validate our methodology using a unique dataset collected from a client panel with full visibility, apply it to a dataset of 700 million device identifiers collected over the course of six weeks in the United States, and show that it outperforms several unsupervised learning approaches. Results show mean precision and recall exceeding 90% for association of identifiers at both the device and user levels. Keith Funkhouser, Matthew Malloy, Enis Ceyhun Alp, Phillip Poon, Paul Barford |
KDD | 3 |
| 2017 | Internet Device GraphsabstractInternet device graphs identify relationships between user-centric internet connected devices such as desktops, laptops, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, TV's, etc. The ability to create such graphs is compelling for online advertising, content customization, recommendation systems, security, and operations. We begin by describing an algorithm for generating a device graph based on IP-colocation, and then apply the algorithm to a corpus of over 2.5 trillion internet events collected over the period of six weeks in the United States. The resulting graph exhibits immense scale with greater than 7.3 billion edges (pair-wise relationships) between more than 1.2 billion nodes (devices), accounting for the vast majority of internet connected devices in the US. Next, we apply community detection algorithms to the graph resulting in a partitioning of internet devices into 100 million small communities representing physical households. We validate this partition with a unique ground truth dataset. We report on the characteristics of the graph and the communities. Lastly, we discuss the important issues of ethics and privacy that must be considered when creating and studying device graphs, and suggest further opportunities for device graph enrichment and application. Matthew Malloy, Paul Barford, Enis Ceyhun Alp, Jonathan Koller, Adria Jewell |
KDD | 3 |