DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued in the remark that require cyclic selection of a proper subset of secure MPC computation parties, such that at least one computation party is excluded from each shuffling cycle and the cyclic selection terminates only after each computation party has been excluded at least once.
selecting a proper subset of MPC computation parties or termination cyclic shuffling upon exclusion of each party at least once.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bellala par 0032 discloses segmentation, i.e. data components, of data by the parties. 0037 The encryption and decryption operations performed by the parties may follow a predetermined order. 0017 discloses when a dataset containing private information belongs to multiple parties, and the parties collectively want to perform analytics on the entire dataset while respecting the privacy and security concerns of each individual party. 0032] FIG. 2A illustrates an example segmentation of data by the parties. More generally, each party Pi shards, i.e. discrete, machine -processable partitions, its local sum into a number of segments. For instance, if party Pi shards its local sum Si into s segments, it generates secret shares a.sub.i1, a.sub.i2, . . . , a.sub.is uniformly randomly, such that Σ.sub.j=1.sup.sa.sub.ij=1 and for 1≤j≤s, a.sub.ij>0. These shares are used to divide Pi's local sum Si into s segments a.sub.i1.Math.S.sub.i, a.sub.i2.Math.S.sub.i, . . . , a.sub.is.Math.S.sub.i (denoted by elements of set S.sub.i={S.sub.i1, S.sub.i2, . . . , S.sub.is} respectively), such that S.sub.i=Σ.sub.j=1.sup.sS.sub.ij.
However, Mahoney et al US 2023/0125593 discloses require cyclic selection of a proper subset of secure MPC computation parties, such that at least one computation party is excluded from each shuffling cycle and the cyclic selection terminates only after each computation party has been excluded at least once( 0056 The particular number of the storage nodes 122, or portions of the data stores 123, may be selected to provide a balance between performance and security. [0058] The shuffle index implemented by shuffle index module 128 acts as an intermediary between the users (e.g., user devices 102) and the data stores 123. In some embodiments, for each data access operation, the shuffle index module 128 carries out a subsequent shuffle operation which shuffles data into different physical locations on the data stores 123 by reordering the leaf nodes of the shuffle index (e.g., leaf nodes of a B+-tree structure). This shuffling operation may involve many downloads and uploads. As a result, neither the user nor the data stores 123 are able to establish access patterns to learn the physical storage location of a given data fragment. [0072] A distribution of the plurality of data fragments is shuffled across a plurality of storage nodes in a storage system in step 610, wherein the shuffling the distribution of the data fragments across the plurality of storage nodes comprises moving at least one data fragment of the plurality of data fragments from a current physical storage location on a current storage node of the plurality of storage nodes to a different physical storage location on a different storage node of the plurality of storage nodes.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,6,8 10,15, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bellala et al US 2018/0205707 in view of Mahony et al US 2023/0125593.
As per claim 1, Bellala discloses a computer-implemented method for data processing, comprising:
obtaining, by each secure multi-party computation (MPC) computation party of n secure MPC computation parties (0040 the multiple parties (e.g., party P1 310, P2 320, and P3 330) ), a first data component sent by a data provider, wherein each first data component comprises a discrete, machine-processable partition of a dataset stored in memory, the partition including one or more structured data records, (0027 the mediator M 140, i.e. a data provider, sends the set of prepared data, i.e. first data, to the Nth party and 0046 (a) Party, i.e. each MPC, Pi receives, obtaining, Ψ either from mediator M (if i=N), or from party P.sub.i+1 (if i≠N)), wherein the data provider splits to-be-processed data into n data components, each first data component being one of n data components, and wherein n is an integer greater than or equal (0026 The first operation involves sharding the data, i.e. first data, into a number of segments. The second operation involves recursively encrypting the data segments with the public keys of mediator M 140 and the multiple parties (assuming N parties) and 0032] FIG. 2A illustrates an example segmentation of data by the parties. More generally, each party Pi shards, i.e. discrete, machine -processable partitions, its local sum into a number of segments. For instance, if party Pi shards its local sum Si into s segments, it generates secret shares a.sub.i1, a.sub.i2, . . . , a.sub.is uniformly randomly, such that Σ.sub.j=1.sup.sa.sub.ij=1 and for 1≤j≤s, a.sub.ij>0. These shares are used to divide Pi's local sum Si into s segments a.sub.i1.Math.S.sub.i, a.sub.i2.Math.S.sub.i, . . . , a.sub.is.Math.S.sub.i (denoted by elements of set S.sub.i={S.sub.i1, S.sub.i2, . . . , S.sub.is} respectively), such that S.sub.i=Σ.sub.j=1.sup.sS.sub.ij. );
selecting m secure MPC computation parties of the n secure MPC computation parties to respectively perform a shuffling operation on respectively held first data components, to obtain a second data component, so as to perform an MPC operation, wherein m is a positive integer satisfying 1 < m < n ( 0027, in the anonymization phase, the Nth party P3 has been selected to perform decryption, then shuffle on the prepared data set [0048] (c) Pi randomly reorders the segments in Ψ.sub.i by using a random shuffle function π and obtain a randomized data set Ψ.sub.i=Ψ.sub.i[π(k)] for 1≤k≤(N*s), i.e. obtain a second data component.) ; and
cyclically performing selecting m secure MPC computation parties to perform a shuffling operation on first data components, wherein the m secure MPC computation parties selected in each shuffling cycle are not completely identical. ( ([0027] the mediator M 140 sends the set of prepared data to the Nth party , the anonymization phase 170 is selecting (e.g., party P3 130 and P2 120 and P111 for decrypting and shuffled the set of the prepared data)., ), until each secure MPC computation party is not selected for at least one time to perform the shuffling operation (0027 then shuffle on the prepared data set and send randomly shuffled data to the (N−1) th party (e.g., party P2 120 ), wherein m secure MPC computation parties selected each time are not completely identical([0027] In the anonymization phase 170, the mediator M 140 sends the set of prepared data to the Nth party (e.g., party P3 130). Here, the Nth party indicates the party to which the last shared public key belongs to. Then, the Nth party can perform decryption, then shuffle on the prepared data set and send randomly shuffled data to the (N−1) th party (e.g., party P2 120). The (N−1)th party can then further decrypt and shuffle the data segments, and this process continues until the data is decrypted and shuffled by the 1st party (e.g., party P1 110). The parties are different P1, P2 and P3 shuffled the prepared data set, the P1 and P2 and P3 are not identical of the M secure parties and wherein each time data shuffle is performed by the different parties as such they are not identical).
Bellala does not discloses require cyclic selection of a proper subset of secure MPC computation parties, such that at least one computation party is excluded from each shuffling cycle and the cyclic selection terminates only after each computation party has been excluded at least once one shuffling cycle.
However, Mahoney discloses require cyclic selection of a proper subset of secure MPC computation parties, such that at least one computation party is excluded from each shuffling cycle and the cyclic selection terminates only after each computation party has been excluded at least once one shuffling cycle ( 0056 The particular number of the storage nodes 122, or portions of the data stores 123, may be selected to provide a balance between performance and security. [0058] The shuffle index implemented by shuffle index module 128 acts as an intermediary between the users (e.g., user devices 102) and the data stores 123. In some embodiments, for each data access operation, the shuffle index module 128 carries out a subsequent shuffle operation which shuffles data into different physical locations on the data stores 123 by reordering the leaf nodes of the shuffle index (e.g., leaf nodes of a B+-tree structure). This shuffling operation may involve many downloads and uploads. As a result, neither the user nor the data stores 123 are able to establish access patterns to learn the physical storage location of a given data fragment. [0072] A distribution of the plurality of data fragments is shuffled across a plurality of storage nodes in a storage system in step 610, wherein the shuffling the distribution of the data fragments across the plurality of storage nodes comprises moving at least one data fragment of the plurality of data fragments from a current physical storage location on a current storage node of the plurality of storage nodes to a different physical storage location on a different storage node of the plurality of storage nodes).
Bellala and Mahony are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of shuttle data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bellala to incorporate the teachings of Mahony and provide selection to provide a balance between performance and security. Doing so would provide protection for storage in the networks, thereby increasing storage protection.
As per claim 6. Bellala and Mahony disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Bellala discloses wherein each time of cyclically performing selecting m secure MPC computation parties to perform a shuffling operation on first data components, a second data component obtained in a previous cycle is reallocated to the n secure MPC computation parties( 0040 the multiple parties (e.g., party P1 310, P2 320, and P3 330 and 0027 the mediator M 140, i.e. a data provider, sends the set of prepared data, i.e. first data, to the Nth party and 0046 (a) Party, i.e. each MPC, Pi receives, obtaining, Ψ either from mediator M (if i=N), or from party P.sub.i+1 (if i≠N) and 0026 The first operation involves sharding the data, i.e. first data, into a number of segments. The second operation involves recursively encrypting the data segments with the public keys of mediator M 140 and the multiple parties (assuming N parties)).
As per claim 8. Bellala and Mahony disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Bellala discloses wherein: each secure MPC computation party comprises at least n secure MPC computation sub-parties, n is a positive integer, and n≥2(0040 the multiple parties (e.g., party P1 310, P2 320, and P3 330 and 0027 the mediator M 140, i.e. a data provider, sends the set of prepared data, i.e. first data, to the Nth party and 0046 (a) Party, i.e. each MPC, Pi receives, obtaining, Ψ either from mediator M (if i=N), or from party P.sub.i+1 (if i≠N) and 0026 The first operation involves sharding the data, i.e. first data, into a number of segments).
As per clams 10, and 19, those claims are rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 1.
As per clam 15, this claim is rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 6.
As per clam 17, this claim is rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 8.
Claim(s) 2, 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bellala et al US 2018/0205707 in view of Mahony et al US 2023/0125593 in view of Prasad et al US 2015/0127924.
As per claim 2. Bellala and Mahony disclose discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Bellala discloses wherein performing, by each secure MPC computation party, the shuffling operation on a first data component held by the secure MPC computation party, to obtain a second data component (0040 the multiple parties (e.g., party P1 310, P2 320, and P3 330)), comprises:
generating a plaintext based on the first data component, wherein each element of the plaintext uniquely corresponds to one piece of sub data in the first data component (0027 the mediator M 140, i.e. a data provider, sends the set of prepared data, i.e. generate first data, to the Nth party);
shuffling elements of the plaintext, to generate a plaintext random sequence (0027 Then, the Nth party can perform decryption, then shuffled on the prepared data set and send randomly shuffled data to the (N−1)th party (e.g., party P2 120). The (N−1)th party can then further decrypt and shuffle the data segments, and this process continues until the data is decrypted and shuffled by the 1st party (e.g., party P1 110) and 0028“shuffling on the prepared data set ); and
performing the shuffling operation on the first data component based on the plaintext random sequence, to obtain the second data component(0027, in the anonymization phase, the Nth party P3 has been selected to perform decryption, then shuffle on the prepared data set [0048] (c) Pi randomly reorders the segments in Ψ.sub.i by using a random shuffle function π and obtain a randomized data set Ψ.sub.i=Ψ.sub.i[π(k)] for 1≤k≤(N*s), i.e. obtain a second data component ).
Bellala does not disclose the shuffling element of the plaintext of array.
However, Prasad discloses the shuffling element of the plaintext of array(0013 an apparatus for processing a shuffle instruction includes shuffle units including an upper shuffle unit and a lower shuffle unit configured in a hierarchical structure, each configured to generate a shuffled data element array by performing shuffling with respect to an input data element array, and wherein the shuffled data element array output from the lower shuffle unit is configured to be input to the upper shuffle unit as a portion of the input data element array of the upper shuffle unit).
Bellala and Prasad and Mahony are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of shuttle data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bellala and Mahony to incorporate the teachings of Prasad and provide shuffling an array can be done to minimizes memory overhead for the large datasets. Doing so would provide minimize the large datasets, thereby increasing memory storage.
As per clam 11, this claim is rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 2.
As per clam 20, this claim is rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5,7,9,12-14,16 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABU S SHOLEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7314. The examiner can normally be reached EST: 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JORGE ORTIZ CRIADO can be reached at 571-272-7624. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABU S SHOLEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496
Prosecution Insights