skip to main content
10.1145/1247480.1247492acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Threats to privacy in the forensic analysis of database systems

Published:11 June 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

The use of any modern computer system leaves unintended traces of expired data and remnants of users' past activities. In this paper, we investigate the unintended persistence of data stored in database systems. This data can be recovered by forensic analysis, and it poses a threat to privacy.

First, we show how data remnants are preserved in database table storage, the transaction log, indexes, and other system components. Our evaluation of several real database systems reveals that deleted data is not securely removed from database storage and that users have little control over the persistence of deleted data.

Second, we address the problem of unintended data retention by proposing a set of system transparency criteria: data retention should be avoided when possible, evident to users when it cannot be avoided, and bounded in time.

Third, we propose specific techniques for secure record deletion and log expunction that increase the transparency of database systems, making them more resistant to forensic analysis.

References

  1. A. Ailamaki, S. Krishnamurthy, S. Papadimitriou, and B. Schroeder. "PostgreSQL", Chapter 26 of Database System Concepts. McGraw-Hill, 5th edition, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkeley db xml. Available at www.sleepycat.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. S. Bauer and N. B. Priyantha. Secure data deletion for linux file systems. In Procedings of the 10th USENIX Security Symposium, pages 153--164, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. P. A. Bernstein and E. Newcomer. Principles of Transaction Processing. Morgan Kaufmann, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. Boneh and R. J. Lipton. A revocable backup system. In USENIX Security Symposium, pages 91--96, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S. Byers. Scalable Exploitation of, and Responses to Information Leakage Through Hidden Data in Published Documents, April 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. R. Card, T. Tso, and S. Tweedie. Design and implementation of the second extended filesystem. In Proc. Dutch International Symposium on Linux, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. B. Carrier. Sleuth toolkit / Autopsy forensic browser. Available at www.sleuthkit.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. B. Carrier. File System Forensic Analysis. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. E. Casey. Digital Evidence and Computer Crime. Elsevier, 2nd edition, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Chow, B. Pfaff, T. Garfinkel, K. Christopher, and M. Rosenblum. Understanding Data Lifetime via Whole System Simulation. In Proc. USENIX Security Symposium, August 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Chow, B. Pfaff, T. Garfinkel, and M. Rosenblum. Shredding Your Garbage: Reducing Data Lifetime Through Secure Deallocation. In Proc. USENIX Security Symposium, August 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual DoD 5220.22-M. www.dss.mil/isec/nispom_0195.pdf, Jan 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Encase forensic. Available at www.guidancesoftware.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. R. Edmonds. Justice department hid parts of report criticizing diversity effort. Associated Press/USA Today, October 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. U.S. Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). www.ed.gov/offices/OII/fpco/ferpa.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. S. L. Garfinkel. Design Principles and Patterns for Computer Systems That Are Simultaneously Secure and Usable. PhD thesis, M.I.T., 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. L. Garfinkel and A. Shelat. Remembrance of data passed: A study of disk sanitization practices. IEEE Security and Privacy, Jan/Feb 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. T. Garfinkel, B. Pfaff, J. Chow, and M. Rosenblum. Data Lifetime is a Systems Problem. In Proc. ACM SIGOPS European Workshop, September 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. M. Geiger and L. Cranor. Scrubbing stubborn data: An evaluation of counter-forensic privacy tools. IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine, 4(5):16--25, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. Goodrich, M. Atallah, and R. Tamassia. Indexing information for data forensics. In Applied Cryptography and Network Security Conference (ACNS), pages 206--221, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. T. Grieve. The decline and fall of the enron empire. Salon Magazine, October 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. P. Gutmann. Secure Deletion of Data from Magnetic and Solid-State Memory. In Proc. USENIX Security Symposium, July 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. U.S. health insurance portability and accountability act (HIPAA). www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. N. M. Haller. The S/Key One-Time Password System. In Proc. ISOC Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security, Feb. 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. B. Klimt and Y. Yang. Introducing the Enron Corpus. In Proc. Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS), July 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. D. Micciancio. Oblivious data structures: applications to cryptography. In Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 456--464, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. C. Mohan, D. Haderle, B. Lindsay, H. Pirahesh, and P. Schwarz. Aries: a transaction recovery method supporting fine-granularity locking and partial rollbacks using write-ahead logging. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 17(1):94--162, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Magnetic storage device procedures. The National Security Agency Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) Policy Manual.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. M. Naor and V. Teague. Anti-persistence: History Independent Data Structures. In Proc. Symposium Theory of Computing, May 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. K. Pavlou and R. T. Snodgrass. Forensic analysis of database tampering. In Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), pages 109--120, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. R. Perlman. The ephemerizer: Making data disappear. Technical Report TR-2005-140, Sun Microsystems, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Z. Peterson, R. Burns, J. Herring, A. Stubblefield, and A. Rubin. Secure Deletion for a Versioning File System. In Proc. File And Storage Technologies (FAST), pages 143--154, December 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. R. Ramakrishnan and J. Gehrke. Database Management Systems. McGraw-Hill, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. R L. Rivest. The RC4 encryption algorithm, Mar 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. R. L. Rivest and A. Shamir. Payword and micromint: Two simple micropayment schemes. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Security Protocols, pages 69--87, London, UK, 1997. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. J. M. Rosenbaum. In defense of the delete key. The Green Bag, 3, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Sqlite. Available at www.sqlite.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Secure hash standard. Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS PUB), 180(1), April 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. J. Shetty and J. Adibi. The enron email dataset database schema and brief statistical report. Technical report, Information Sciences Institute, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. A. Silberchatz, H. Korth, and S. Sudarshan. Database System Concepts. McGraw-Hill, 5th edition, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. R. T. Snodgrass, S. S. Yao, and C. Collberg. Tamper detection in audit logs. In VLDB Conference, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. M. Stonebraker and L. A. Rowe. The design of postgres. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 340--355, 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Threats to privacy in the forensic analysis of database systems

                Recommendations

                Comments

                Login options

                Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                Sign in
                • Published in

                  cover image ACM Conferences
                  SIGMOD '07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data
                  June 2007
                  1210 pages
                  ISBN:9781595936868
                  DOI:10.1145/1247480
                  • General Chairs:
                  • Lizhu Zhou,
                  • Tok Wang Ling,
                  • Program Chair:
                  • Beng Chin Ooi

                  Copyright © 2007 ACM

                  Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                  Publisher

                  Association for Computing Machinery

                  New York, NY, United States

                  Publication History

                  • Published: 11 June 2007

                  Permissions

                  Request permissions about this article.

                  Request Permissions

                  Check for updates

                  Qualifiers

                  • Article

                  Acceptance Rates

                  Overall Acceptance Rate785of4,003submissions,20%

                PDF Format

                View or Download as a PDF file.

                PDF

                eReader

                View online with eReader.

                eReader