CPDP

1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, cloud storage service has become a faster profit growth point by providing a comparably low-cost, scalable, position-independent platform for clients data. Since cloud computing environment is constructed based on open architectures and interfaces it has the capability to incorporate multiple internal and/or external cloud services together to provide high interoperability. We call such a distributed cloud environment as a multi- loud !or hybrid cloud". #ften, by using virtual infrastructure management !$I%", a multi-cloud allows clients to easily access his/her resources remotely through interfaces. &here exist various tools and technologies for multi-cloud. &hese tools help cloud providers to construct a distributed cloud storage platform !' S(" for managing clients data. )owever, if such an important platform is vulnerable to security attac*s, it would bring irretrievable losses to the clients. +or example, the confidential data in an enterprise may be illegally accessed through a remote interface provided by a multi-cloud, or relevant data and archives may be lost or tampered with when they are stored into an uncertain storage pool outside the enterprise. &herefore, it is indispensable for cloud service providers ! S(s" to provide security techni,ues for managing their storage services. (rovable data possession !('(" !or proofs of retrievability !(#-" " is such a probabilistic proof techni,ue for a storage provider to prove the integrity and ownership of clients data. $arious ('( schemes have been recently proposed, such as Scalable ('( and 'ynamic ('( . )owever, these schemes mainly focus on ('( issues at untrusted servers in a single cloud storage provider and are not suitable for a multi-cloud environment.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

2. SYSTEM ANALYSIS
2.1 LITERATURE SURVEY

&he previously implemented three related wor*s are .am /em 0i et al. highlights ('( scheme use for verification to avoid public verification. &his paper proposed initial ('( solution to -S1 based hash function to authenticate the remote server storage data. )owever due to -S1 based cryptosystem, the entire computing speed is low. 2ian Wang et al. proposes a protocol for integrity verification in multi-cloud. &his paper explored the problem of providing simultaneous public audibility and data dynamic for remote data integrity chec* in cloud computing. /an 3hu et al. give a collaborative provable data possession scheme, but the integrity of the paper is effected due to its high complexity.

2.2 EXISTING SYSTEM

&here exist various tools and technologies for multi-cloud, such as (latform $% #rchestrator, $%ware vSphere, and #virt. &hese tools help cloud providers construct a distributed cloud storage platform for managing clients data. )owever, if such an important platform is vulnerable to security attac*s, it would bring huge losses to the clients. &herefore, cloud service providers are highly responsible to provide security techni,ues for managing their storage services. In order to provide a low-cost, scalable, location independent platform for managing clients data, current cloud storage systems adopt several new distributed file systems. &hese file systems share some similar features li*e, files are split into bloc*s or chun*s and stored on bloc* servers , the systems are comprised of interconnected clusters of bloc* servers etc.&hose features enable cloud service providers to store and process large amounts of data. )owever, it is crucial to offer an efficient verification on the integrity and availability of stored data for detecting faults and automatic recovery. 1lthough existing schemes can ma*e Dept. of Computer Science & Engg AWH Engg. College

CPDP

a false or true decision for data possession at untrusted stores , they are not suitable for a distributed cloud storage environment since they were not originally constructed on interactive proof System. &he existing schemes are using an authenticated s*ip list to chec* the integrity of file bloc*s ad4acently in space. When a client as*s for a file bloc*, the server needs to send the file bloc* along with a proof for the intactness of the bloc*. )owever this process incurs significant communication overhead in a multi-cloud environment, since the server in one cloud typically needs to generate such a proof with the help of other cloud storage services, where the ad4acent bloc*s are stored. 'ue to lac* of homomorphic responses, clients must invo*e the ('( protocol repeatedly to chec* the integrity of file bloc*s stored in multiple cloud servers. 1lso, clients need to *now the exact position of each file bloc* in a multi-cloud environment. In addition, the verification process in such a case will lead to high communication overheads and computation costs at client sides as well. &herefore, it is of utmost necessary to design a cooperative ('( model to

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

reduce the storage and networ* overheads and enhance the transparency of verification activities in cluster-based cloud storage systems. &o establish a highly effective security model, it is necessary to analy5e the ('( scheme within the framewor* of 5ero-*nowledge proof system !36(S" due to the reason that ('( system is essentially an interactive proof system !I(S", which has been well studied in the cryptography community.

2.3

PROPOSED SYSTEM
&o provide a low-cost, scalable, location independent platform for managing

clients data. In this paper we address the problem of provable data possession in distributed cloud environment from the following aspects7 high security, transparent verification and high performance. &o achieve these goals, we first propose a verification framewor* for multi-cloud storage along with two fundamental techni,ues7 hash index hierarchy !)I)" and homomorphic verifiable response !)$-". We then demonstrate that the possibility of constructing a cooperative ('( ! ('(" scheme without compromising data privacy based on modern cryptographic techni,ues, such as interactive proof system !I(S". We further introduce an effective construction of ('( scheme using above-mentioned structure. %oreover, we give a security analysis of our ('( scheme from the I(S model. We prove that this construction is a multi-prover 5ero*nowledge proof system !%(-36(S" , which has completeness, *nowledge soundness, and 5ero-*nowledge properties. &o improve the system performance with respect to our scheme, we analy5e the performance of probabilistic ,ueries for detecting abnormal situations. &his probabilistic method also has an inherent benefit in reducing computation and communication overheads. &hen, we present an efficient method for the selection of optimal parameter values to minimi5e the computation overheads of S(s and the clients operations. In addition, we analy5e that our scheme is suitable for existing distributed cloud storage systems. +inally, our experiments show that our solution introduces very limited computation and communication overheads.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

3. FEASIBILITY STUDY
&he feasibility study is an evaluation and analysis of the potential of a proposed pro4ect. &his is based on extensive investigation and research to support the process of decision ma*ing. It aims to ob4ectively and rationally uncover the strengths and wea*ness of the proposed system, opportunities and threats present in the environment, the resource re,uired to carry through, and ultimately the prospects for success, in its simplest, the two criteria to 4udge feasibility are cost re,uired and value to be attained. &he goal of feasibility study is to evaluate alternative systems and propose the most feasible and desirable systems of designing. &hree type of feasibility study are 8. &echnical feasibility 9. #perational feasibility :. ;conomical feasibility

3.1TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
&he technical feasibility assessment is focused on gaining and understanding of the present technical resources of the organi5ation and their applicability to the expected needs of the proposed system. It is an evaluation of the hardware and software and how it meets the need of the proposed system. 1s per the re,uirements of our pro4ect, it wor*s on the user based systems li*e windows. Since all the re,uirements are within the reach of modern technology we would say that the system is technically feasible.

3.2 OPERATIONAL FEASIBILITY

#perational feasibility is a measure of how well proposed systems solve the problems, and ta*es advantage of the opportunities defined during scope definition and how it satisfies the re,uirements identified in the re,uirement analysis phase of system development. &he proposed pro4ect is said to be beneficial only if they can be modules and carved out into a system that will meet all the re,uirements. &he best for the feasibility prohibits if the system would run without faults when it is deployed or there are any ma4or hurdles to be the Dept. of Computer Science & Engg AWH Engg. College

CPDP

implementations of the proposed system. &he proposed system is not supposed to cause any harm to the user or the computer that is being used. &he proposed system is safe and secure.

3.3 ECONOMICAL FEASIBILITY

&he purpose of the economic feasibility assessment is to determine the positive economic benefits to the organi5ation that the proposed system will provide. &he system is found to be economically feasible since the cost of development is very less and only minimum maintenance is re,uired. &he software is developed with an intension that it will be affordable to all users compared to the benefit provided by the system costs very less.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

4. COST ESTIMATION

1 cost estimate is the approximation of the cost of a pro4ect .&he cost estimate is the product of the cost estimating process. ost estimation is one of the important steps in pro4ect management. 1 cost estimate, establishes the base line of the pro4ect cost at different stages of pro4ect development. ;stimating method may vary by type and class of estimate. &he proper documentation and review are also important in the process of cost estimation.

&he cost estimation of the software is assessed on the basis of hardware , software and operational cost. )ardware cost includes the cost of personal computers with an internet connection. &he software cost includes the cost of software re,uired to run the system such as $isual studio, Windows <. #perational cost includes the cost associated with day to day operations li*e electricity.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

5. REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION
&he re,uirement specification includes functional and non-functional re,uirements. . +unctional re,uirements are supported by non-functional re,uirements !also *nown as ,uality re,uirements", which impose constraints on the design or implementation !such as performance re,uirements, security, or reliability". =enerally, functional re,uirements are expressed in the form >system must do ?, while non-functional re,uirements are >system shall be ?. &he plan for implementing functional re,uirements is detailed in the system design. &he plan for implementing non-functional re,uirements is detailed in the system architecture.

5.1 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS

1 functional re,uirement defines a function of a system or its component. 1 function is described as a set of inputs, the behaviour, and outputs. +unctional re,uirements may be calculations, technical details, data manipulation and processing and other specific functionality that define what a system is supposed to accomplish. @ehavioural re,uirements describing all the cases where the system uses the functional re,uirements are captured in use cases. &he functional re,uirements are the description of the facility or feature re,uired. +unctional re,uirement deal with what the system should do or provide for users.

&he functional re,uirements include (ublic account sign up 0ogin +ile upload +ile download 1pproval of users Send notification $iew users AWH Engg. College

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

CPDP

"

Send feedbac*

5.2 NON.FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS

.on-functional re,uirements are a description and where possible, target values of associated non-functional re,uirement. &hey describe how, how well or to what standard a function should be provided. .on. functional re,uirements may cover the system as whole or relate to specific functional re,uirements. .on-functional re,uirements are often called ,ualities of a system. &here exist various tools and technologies for multi cloud. &hese tools help cloud service providers to construct a distributed cloud storage platform for managing clients data. ('( is a techni,ue for ensuring the integrity of data in storage outsourcing. loud computing environments have become a faster profit growth point in system ensures that the file of the user achieves recent years. It can provide comparably low cost, scalable position independent platform for managing the datas of client. &he complete privacy protection. 1nd the system is constructing a co-operative ('( scheme without compromising data privacy, and also introduces very limited computation and communication overheads

5.3USE CASE DIAGRAM

1 use case diagram at its simplest is the representation of a users interaction with the system and depicting the specifications of a use case. 1 use case diagram can portray the different type of users of a system and the various ways that they interact with the system. &hey provide the simplified and graphical representation of what the system must actually do. &he main components of a use case diagram are actors, functionalities and relationships. &he actors can be human user, some internal applications or may be some external applications. So in a brief when we are planning to draw an use case diagram we should have the following items identified.

+unctionalities to be represented as an use case 1ctors AWH Engg. College

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

CPDP

1#

-elationships among the use cases and actors.

So in brief, the purposes of use case diagrams can be as follows7

Ased to gather re,uirements of a system. Ased to get an outside view of a system. Identify external and internal factors influencing the system. Show the interacting among the re,uirements are actors.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

11

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

12

6. SYSTEM SPECIFICATION

6.1 SOFTWARE SPECIFICATION

&he software re,uirements specification document enlists all necessary re,uirements that are re,uired for the pro4ect development. &hey are

#perating system7 Windows < or above &he tool used is I';, visual studio with internet connection. +ront end7cB.net @ac* end7 S20 server 9CCD &he technology used is ..et (latform used 7%icrosoft visual studio 9C8C 'ocumentation7 %icrosoft word 9CC< (resentation7 %icrosoft (ower(oint 9C89

6.1.1 .N ! "#$% &'#(

It is a software framewor* developed by %icrosoft that runs primarily on %icrosoft windows. It includes a large library and provides language that language inter-operatability across several programming languages. (rograms written for ..et framewor* execute in a software environment *nown as thecommon language run time! 0-",an application virtual machine that provides service such as security, memory management and exception handling. &he class library and 0- together constitute ..et framewor*. .et framewor*s base class library provides user interface ,data access, database connectivity ,cryptography ,web-application development, numeric algorithms and networ* communication. &he programmers produce software by combining their own source code with ..et frame wor* and other libraries...et frame wor* is intended to be used by most new

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

13

application created for the windows platform. %icrosoft also produces an integrated development environment largely for ..et software called visual studio.

6.1.2 M)*#'+'"! SQL + #, #

It is a relational database management system developed by %icrosoft, a database, it is a software product whose primary function is to store and retrieve data as re,uested by other software applications, be it those on the same computer or those running on another computer across a networ*. &here are at least a do5en different editions of %icrosoft S20 server aimed at different audiences and for wor*load ranging from small single machine applications to large internet facing applications with many concurrent users.

6.2 HARDWARE SPECIFICATION

&he hardware re,uirements specification includes all necessary re,uirements that are re,uired for the development of pro4ect. (rocessor 7 Intel dual core -1%78C9E %@ )ard dis*7 EC =@ Input devices 7 6eyboard, %ouse #utput device 7 %onitor

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

14

-. SYSTEM DESIGN
Systems design is the process of defining the architecture, components, modules, interfaces, and data for a system to satisfy specified re,uirements

-.1 MODULE DESCRIPTION

1 module description provides detailed information about the module of the pro4ect and its supported components, which is accessible in different manners. +unctions of 1dmin, 0ogin $iew Asers 1pprove Asers Send .otification $iew +eedbac* +unctions of Asers 0ogin +ile Apload +ile download $iew own +iles 'elete own +iles $iew file logs +ile Sharing .otification $iew Dept. of Computer Science & Engg AWH Engg. College

CPDP

15

Send +eedbac* +unctions of (ublic 8" 1ccount Signup

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

16

-.2 SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE

1 system architecture or systems architecture is the conceptual model that defines the structure, behaviour, and more views of a system. 1n architecture description is a formal description and representation of a system, organi5ed in a way that supports reasoning about the structures of the system.

FILE

THIRD P ARTY(TP)

Cloud

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

-.3 WOR.ING PRINCIPLE

&he area of our pro4ect is file security that is to store and maintain the datas of the client in a multi-cloud environment. &he file uploaded by the user is first encrypted into an unreadable format by a trusted third party. &he algorithm used for encryption is -i4ndael algoritham.&he *ey used for encryption is stored in the database. 1fter encryption the hash value of the file is calculated using %'F algoritham.1nd the hash value is also stored in the database. 1fter this step the file is splitted into two parts. &he different parts are stored in different servers. &he figure below shows the diagram of storing data.

When the user ma*e re,uest to view the uploaded file, the file id is transferred to all servers and the file bloc*s corresponding to the re,uested file id is transferred to main server. &he trusted third party combines the different file bloc*s and computes the new hash value. .ow the old and new hash values are combined if it matches the file will be displayed to the user after decryption. #therwise an error message will be displayed.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

1!

-.3.1 R)/01$ 2 $23'#)!4$% &he 1dvanced ;ncryption Standard !1;S" is a specification for the encryption of electronic data established by the A.S..ational Institute of Standards and &echnology!.IS&" in 9CC8. 1;S is based on the -i4ndael cipher developed by two @elgian cryptographers, Goan 'aemen and $incent -i4men, who submitted a proposal to .IS& during the 1;S selection process. -i4ndael is a family of ciphers with different *ey and bloc* si5es. +or 1;S, .IS& selected three members of the -i4ndael family, each with a bloc* si5e of 89D bits, but three different *ey lengths7 89D, 8H9 and 9FI bits. 1;S has been adopted by the A.S. government and is now used worldwide. It supersedes the 'ata ;ncryption Standard !';S",which was published in 8H<<. &he algorithm described by 1;S is a symmetric-*ey algorithm, meaning the same *ey is used for both encrypting and decrypting the data. &he name $i%n&'el is a play on the names of the two inventors !Goan 'aemen and $incent -i4men".

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

1"

-.3.1.1 H)3452 , 2 1 +*#)6!)'0 '" !4 $23'#)!4%

8.

6ey;xpansionJround *eys are derived from the cipher *ey using -i4ndaelKs *ey schedule. 1;S re,uires a separate 89D-bit round *ey bloc* for each round plus one more.

9. Initial-ound
8.

AddRoundKeyJeach byte of the state is combined with a bloc* of the round *ey using bitwise xor.

:. -ounds
8.

SubBytesJa non-linear substitution step where each byte is replaced with another according to a loo*up table. ShiftRowsJa transposition step where the last three rows of the state are shifted cyclically a certain number of steps. MixColumnsJa mixing operation which operates on the columns of the state, combining the four bytes in each column. AddRoundKey SubBytes ShiftRows AddRoundKey.

9.

:.

E.

E. +inal -ound !no MixColumns"

8. 9. :.

-.3.2 MD5
&he MD5 message-digest algorithm is a widely used cryptographic hash function producing a 89D-bit !8I-byte" hash value, typically expressed in text format as a :9 digit hexadecimal number. %'F has been utili5ed in a wide variety of cryptographic applications, and is also commonly used to verify data integrity. %'F was designed by -on -ivest in 8HH8 to replace an earlier hash function, %'E.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

2#

-.3.2.1 A23'#)!4$%7 %'F processes a variable-length message into a fixed-length output of 89D bits. &he input message is bro*en up into chun*s of F89-bit bloc*s !sixteen :9-bit words"L the message is padded so that its length is divisible by F89. &he padding wor*s as follows7 first a single bit, 8, is appended to the end of the message. &his is followed by as many 5eros as are re,uired to bring the length of the message up to IE bits fewer than a multiple of F89. &he remaining bits are filled up with IE bits representing the length of the original message, modulo 9IE.

-.5 DATA FLOW DIAGRAM

1 data flow diagram !'+'" is a graphical representation of the >flow> of data through an information system, modelling its process aspects. #ften they are a preliminary step used to create an overview of the system which can later be elaborated. 1 '+' shows what *ind of information will be input to and output from the system, where the data will come from and go to, and where the data will be stored. It does not show information about the timing of processes, or information about whether processes will operate in se,uence or in parallel. &here are different notations to draw data flow diagrams !/ourdon M oad and =ane M Sarson", defining different visual representations for processes, data stores, data flow, and external entities

+unction7

input/output

data flow

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

21

L , 2 87

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

22

L , 2 19:+ #;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

23

L , 2 19$1%)0;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

24

L , 2 196:<2)*;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

25

-.6 ER DIAGRAM
In software engineering, an entityNrelationship model !;- model" is a data model for describing the data or information aspects of a business domain or its process re,uirements, in an abstract way that lends itself to ultimately being implemented in a database such as a relational database. &he main components of ;- models are entities !things" and the relationships that can exist among them. &he process is modelled as components !entities" that are lin*ed with each other by rel'tions(ips that express the dependencies and re,uirements between them. . ;ntities may have various properties !'ttri)utes" that characteri5e them. 'iagrams created to represent these entities, attributes, and relationships graphically are called entityN relationship diagrams. I.+#-%1&I#.7 E0!)!= 1 data entity is anything real or abstract about which we want to store data. ;ntity types fall into five classes7 roles, events, locations, tangible things or concepts. ;.g. employee, payment, campus, boo*. Specific examples of an entity are called )0+!$0* +. ;.g. the employee Gohn Gones, %ary SmithKs payment, etc. R 2$!)'0+4)6 1 data relationship is a natural association that exists between one or more entities. ;.g. ;mployees process payments. C$#1)0$2)!=defines the number of occurrences of one entity for a single occurrence of the related entity. ;.g. an employee may process many payments but might not process any payments depending on the nature of her 4ob. A!!#)<:! 1 data attribute is a characteristic common to all or most instances of a particular entity. Synonyms include property, data element, field. ;.g. .ame, address, ;mployee .umber, pay rate are all attributes of the entity employee. 1n attribute or combination of

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

26

attributes that uni,uely identifies one and only one instance of an entity is called a 6#)%$#= ( = or )1 0!)") #. ;.g. ;mployee .umber is a primary *ey for ;mployee.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

-.- DATABASE DESIGN

&his section of database design includes the list of tables included in the pro4ect. 1nd it also contains the different fields included in each table with its description, data type and constraints. Include mainly I tables, they are 0ogin table Aser registration table .otification table +ile table +eedbac* table +ile log table 0ogin table FIELD Aser name (assword &ype DATA TYPE $archar $archar $archar DESCRIPTION &o enter user name +or security 1dmin / Aser CONSTRAINTS (rimary 6ey

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

2!

U+ # # 3)+!#$!)'0 !$<2

FIELD

DATA TYPE Int $archar $archar $archar $archar 'atetime @ig int $archar $archar $archar $archar

DESCRIPTION

CONSTRAIN TS

Aser id +irst name 0ast name =ender ;mail id 'ate of birth (hone no ountry Aser name Security 2ustn 1nswer

Ani,ue number .ame of user .ame of user %ale /+emale %ail id of user '#@ of user (hn no of user ountry of user Ased for login +or security +or security

(rimary 6ey

.otification &able

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

2"

FIELD .otification I' Sub4ect %essage +ilename

DATA TYPE int $archar!FC" $archar!FC" $archar!FC"

DESCRIPTION Ani,ue no. for notification Sub4ect of message %essage from admin .ame of file

CONSTRAINTS (rimary *ey

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

3#

.otification &able

FIELD .otification I' Sub4ect %essage +ilename

DATA TYPE int $archar!FC" $archar!FC" $archar!FC"

DESCRIPTION Ani,ue no. for notification Sub4ect of message %essage from admin .ame of file

CONSTRAINTS (rimary *ey

+eedbac* table

FIELD

DATA TYPE

DESCRIPTION

CONSTRAINTS

Aser id +eed bac* date

int $archar!FC" datetime

Ani,ue I' +eedbac* from user 'ate of sending feedbac*

(rimary 6ey

+ile 0og table Dept. of Computer Science & Engg AWH Engg. College

CPDP

31

FIELD Aser id +ile id 'ownload date

DATA TYPE int Int 'atetime

DESCRIPTION Ani,ue I' of user Ani,ue I' of file 'ate of downloading

CONSTRAINTS +oreign 6ey

-.> INPUT DESCRIPTION

&he input description of the pro4ect includes the different forms in the pro4ect that are used for input. &he different input forms are 0ogin (ublic -egistration 1dmin-manage user 1dmin Send notification Aser file upload Aser-send feedbac* to admin

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

32

L'3)0 "'#%7

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

33

Ased for new registration of public.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

34

A1%)0?%$0$3 :+ #

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

35

A1%)0?+ 01 0'!)")*$!)'0

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

36

Ased by admin to send notification to users U+ # ")2 :62'$1

Ased by user to upload files

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

U+ # + 01 " 1<$*(

-.@ OUTPUT DECSCRIPTION

&he input description of the pro4ect includes the different forms in the pro4ect that are used for input. &he different input forms are 1dmin $iew feedbac* Aser file download

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

3!

A1%)0?,) & " 1<$*(

U+ # ")2 1'&02'$1

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

3"

Ased by user to download files

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

4#

>. IMPLEMENTATION

&he implementation of the pro4ect includes the code of the pro4ect and screenshots

>.1 SAMPLE CODING

Dpob : using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Data; using System.Data.SqlClient; /// <summary> /// Summary description or dbop /// </summary> public class dbop ! public dbop"# ! // // $%D%: &dd constructor logic 'ere // ( SqlConnection cn ) ne* SqlConnection"+,Data Source).-S.L/012/SS;&ttac'Db3ilename)C:-inetpub-***root-cpdp-&pp4Data- ile security.md ;5ntegrated Security)$rue;6ser 5nstance)$rue,#; public 7oid nonret"string a# ! SqlCommand cmd ) ne* SqlCommand"#; cmd.Connection ) cn; cmd.Command$e8t ) a; cn.%pen"#; cmd./8ecute9on.uery"#; cn.Close"#; ( public Data$able ret"string a# ! SqlCommand cmd ) ne* SqlCommand"#; cmd.Connection ) cn; cmd.Command$e8t ) a; SqlData&dapter da ) ne* SqlData&dapter"#; Data$able dt ) ne* Data$able"#; da.SelectCommand ) cmd; da.3ill"dt#; return dt;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP
( public int ma8"string a# ! SqlCommand cmd ) ne* SqlCommand"#; cmd.Connection ) cn; cmd.Command$e8t ) a; int m8id; cn.%pen"#; try ! m8id ) Con7ert.$o5nt:;"cmd./8ecuteScalar"#.$oString"## < =; ( catc' ! m8id ) =; ( inally ! cn.Close"#; ( return m8id;

41

( (

'ownload
using using using using using using using using using using using System; System.Collections.Generic; System.Linq; System.Web; System.Web.65; System.Web.65.WebControls; System.Data; System.Data.SqlClient; System.9et; System.Security; System.Security.Cryptograp'y;

public partial class De ault> : System.Web.65.1age ! string s; dbop d ) ne* dbop"#; protected 7oid 1age4Load"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! i "A5s1ostBacC# ! DultiEie*=.Set&cti7eEie*"Eie*=#; ( ( protected 7oid DataGrid=4Selected5nde8C'anged"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! (

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP
protected 7oid Button=4ClicC"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! s ) ,select F rom G ile tableH *'ere o*nerid) ,<SessionG,uid,H<, and ilename liCe IJ, < $e8tBo8=.$e8t < ,JI,; Data$able dt ) ne* Data$able"#; dt ) d.ret"s#; DataGrid=.DataSource ) dt; DataGrid=.DataBind"#; ( protected 7oid DataGrid=45temCommand"ob?ect source@ DataGridCommand/7ent&rgs e# ! i "e.Command9ame )) ,7ie*,# ! string y ) e.5tem.CellsGKH.$e8t; SessionG,C,H ) y; ( DultiEie*=.Set&cti7eEie* "Eie*;#; string C ) e.5tem.CellsGLH.$e8t; ttp=.ttp s ) ne* ttp=.ttp"#; byte GH ?) s. ile4do*nload"C#; SessionG,msg,H ) ?; string ms ) System.$e8t./ncoding.&SC55.GetString"?#; // $e8tBo8:.$e8t ) ms; string r ) ,select GCeyH@'as'7alue ileid), < e.5tem.CellsGLH.$e8t < ,,; Data$able dt ) ne* Data$able"#; rom G ile tableH *'ere

42

dt) d.ret"r#; $e8tBo8>.$e8t ) dt.2o*sGLHGLH.$oString"#; SessionG,'s',H ) dt.2o*sGLHG=H.$oString"#; ( protected 7oid $e8tBo8;4$e8tC'anged"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! ( protected 7oid $e8tBo8>4$e8tC'anged"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! ( protected 7oid Button;4ClicC"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! ( protected 7oid Button:4ClicC"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! string C ) SessionG,C,H.$oString"#; byteGH ) ne* byteG;>H;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP
)Con7ert.3romBaseM>String"C#; D/Sclass l ) ne* D/Sclass"#; l.Cey ) ; byteGH lC )"byte GH# SessionG,msg,H; byteGH old's' ) Con7ert.3romBaseM>String"SessionG,'s',H.$oString"##; DDKCryptoSer7ice1ro7ider md ) ne* DDKCryptoSer7ice1ro7ider"#; byte GH c) md.ComputeNas'"lC#; i ! "Con7ert.$oBaseM>String"old's'#))Con7ert.$oBaseM>String"c##

43

l.i7 ) ne* byteGH ! L@ L@ L@ L@ L@ L@ L@ L (; string msg ) l.DecryptString3romBytes"lC@ l.Cey@ l.i7#; ( else ! ( $e8tBo8K.$e8t ) msg;

$e8tBo8K.$e8t ) ,Nas' 7alues are not same,;

( protected 7oid $e8tBo8K4$e8tC'anged"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! (

Apload
using using using using using using using using using System; System.Collections.Generic; System.Linq; System.Web; System.Web.65; System.Web.65.WebControls; System.Data; System.Security.Cryptograp'y; System.Security;

public partial class De ault> : System.Web.65.1age ! protected 7oid 1age4Load"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! i "A5s1ostBacC# ! DultiEie*=.Set&cti7eEie*"Eie*=#; b ) ,select F rom G ile tableH *'ere o*nerid),<SessionG,uid,H<,,; dt ) d.ret"b#; DataGrid=.DataSource ) dt; DataGrid=.DataBind"#;

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

44

( ( Data$able dt ) ne* Data$able"#; dbop d ) ne* dbop"#; string b ) ,,; protected 7oid Button=4ClicC"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! i "C'ecCBo8=.C'ecCed )) true# ! b ) b < C'ecCBo8=.$e8t; ( else ! b ) ,null,; ( byteGH a ) 3ile6pload=.3ileBytes;

string d=; d= ) System.$e8t./ncoding.&SC55.GetString"a#; D/Sclass m ) ne* D/Sclass"#; m.Ceygen"#; string Cey@ i7; Cey ) Con7ert.$oBaseM>String"m.Cey#; i7 ) Con7ert.$oBaseM>String"m.i7#; byteGH ? ) m./ncryptString$oBytes"d=@ m.Cey@ m.i7#;

DDKCryptoSer7ice1ro7ider md ) ne* DDKCryptoSer7ice1ro7ider"#; byte GH 's') md.ComputeNas'"?#; string str's' ) Con7ert.$oBaseM>String"'s'#; string s ) ,insert into G ile tableH 7alues", < $e8tBo8=.$e8t < ,@, < SessionG,uid,H.$oString"# < ,@I, < 3ile6pload=.3ile9ame < ,I@, < $e8tBo8;.$e8t < ,@ItypeI@I, < Cey < ,I@I, < str's' < ,I@I, < b < ,I#,; d.nonret"s#; ttp=.ttp C ) ne* ttp=.ttp"#; C. ile4upload"?@ $e8tBo8=.$e8t#; i ! "C'ecCBo8=.C'ecCed )) true# b ) b < C'ecCBo8=.$e8t;

( else !

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP
b ) ,null,; (

45

//SessionG,pat',H ) ,O-- ileupload--, < 3ile6pload=.3ile9ame;

( protected 7oid Button;4ClicC"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! DultiEie*=.Set&cti7eEie*"Eie*;#; string c ) ,select ma8" ileid# rom G ile tableH,; $e8tBo8=.$e8t ) d.ma8"c#.$oString"#; $e8tBo8;.$e8t ) System.Date$ime.9o*.$oS'ortDateString"#; ( protected 7oid DataGrid=4Selected5nde8C'anged"ob?ect sender@ /7ent&rgs e# ! ( (

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

46

>.2 SCREEN SHOTS

0ogin page

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

(ublic registration page

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

4!

+eedbac* sending page of user

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

4"

Send notification page of admin

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

5#

@. TESTING
@.1 UNIT TESTING
In computer programming, unit testing is a method by which individual unit of source code, sets of one or more computer program modules together with associated control data, user procedure and operating procedure are tested to determine if they are fit to use.Intuitively,one can view a unit as the smallest testable part of an application.

@.2 INTEGRATION TESTING

&hrough each program wor* individually they should wor* after lin*ing together. &his is referred to as interfacing. 'ata may be lost across the interfaceL one module can have adverse effect on the other. Subroutine after lin*ing may not do the desired function expected by the main routine. Integration testing is the systematic techni,ue for constructing the program structure while at the same time conducting test to uncover errors associated with the interface. Asing integrated test plan prepared in the design phase of the system development has a guide, the integration test was carried out. 1ll the errors found in the system were corrected for the next testing step. P#'/ *! A+6 *!7 1fter connecting the bac*-end and the front-end as whole module, the data entered in the front-end once submitted were successfully entered in the database. #n re,uest, data were successfully retrieved into forms.

@.3SYSTEM TESTING
1fter performing the integration testing, the next step is output testing of the proposed system..o system could be useful if doesnt produce the re,uired output in a specific format. &he output generated are displayed by the system under consideration and then tested by comparing with the format re,uired by the user.)ere the output format is considered into two ways ,one in on-screen and other in printed format.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

51

18. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we presented the construction of an efficient ('( scheme for distributed cloud storage. @ased on homomorphic verifiable response and hash index hierarchy, we have proposed a cooperative ('( scheme to support dynamic scalability on multiple storage servers. We also showed that our scheme provided all security properties re,uired by 5ero *nowledge interactive proof system, so that it can resist various attac*s. #ur experiments clearly demonstrated that our approaches only introduce a small amount of computation and communication overheads. &herefore, our solution can be treated as a new candidate for data integrity verification in outsourcing data storage systems.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

52

11. FUTURE ENHANCEMENT

1s part of future wor*, we would extend our wor* to explore more effective ('(

constructions. +irst, from our experiments we found that the performance of ('( scheme, especially for large files, is affected due to its high complexity. .ext, from a practical point of view, we still need to address some issues about integrating our ('( scheme smoothly with existing systems,

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

53

12. REFERENCES

O8P .I;;; paper on

o-operative provable data possession for integrity verification using

multi cloud storage. O9P http7//www.slideshare.net/ieeexplorepro4ects/cooperative-provable-data-possession-forintegrity-integrity-verification-in-multi-cloud-storageba*

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College

CPDP

54

13. GLOSSARY
o.#perative ('(7&wo or more ('( schemes which co.operatively wor*s loud Service (rovider7 'ifferent services that provide cloud computing environment. %ulti-cloud7 more than one cloud computing environments combined together. ('(7 provable data possession scheme to prove the integrity of data to user.

Dept. of Computer Science & Engg

AWH Engg. College