IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v17y2025i3p128-d1612953.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GHEFL: Grouping Based on Homomorphic Encryption Validates Federated Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Yulin Kang

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

  • Wuzheng Tan

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

  • Linlin Fan

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

  • Yinuo Chen

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

  • Xinbin Lai

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

  • Jian Weng

    (College of Cyber Security, Jinan University, Guangzhou 511436, China)

Abstract

Federated learning is a powerful tool for securing participants’ private data due to its ability to make data “available but not visible”. In recent years, federated learning has been enhanced by the emergence of multi-weight aggregation protocols, which minimize the impact of erroneous parameters, and verifiable protocols, which prevent server misbehavior. However, it still faces significant security and performance challenges. Malicious participants may infer the private data of others or carry out poisoning attacks to compromise the model’s correctness. Similarly, malicious servers may return incorrect aggregation results, undermining the model’s convergence. Furthermore, substantial communication overhead caused by interactions between participants or between participants and servers hinders the development of federated learning. In response to this, this paper proposes GHEFL, a group-based, verifiable, federated learning method based on homomorphic encryption that aims to prevent servers from maliciously stealing participant privacy data or performing malicious aggregation. While ensuring the usability of the aggregated model, it strives to minimize the workload on the server as much as possible. Finally, we experimentally evaluate the performance of GHEFL.

Suggested Citation

  • Yulin Kang & Wuzheng Tan & Linlin Fan & Yinuo Chen & Xinbin Lai & Jian Weng, 2025. "GHEFL: Grouping Based on Homomorphic Encryption Validates Federated Learning," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:128-:d:1612953
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/17/3/128/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/17/3/128/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Gal-Or & Anindya Ghose, 2005. "The Economic Incentives for Sharing Security Information," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 186-208, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xing Gao, 2023. "A competitive analysis of software quality investment with technology diversification and security concern," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 2691-2712, December.
    2. Kjell Hausken, 2017. "Security Investment, Hacking, and Information Sharing between Firms and between Hackers," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Myriam Dunn Cavelty, 2018. "Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 22-30.
    4. Xiaotong Li, 2022. "An evolutionary game‐theoretic analysis of enterprise information security investment based on information sharing platform," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(3), pages 595-606, April.
    5. Arvin Sahaym & Joseph Vithayathil & Suprateek Sarker & Saonee Sarker & Niels Bjørn-Andersen, 2023. "Value Destruction in Information Technology Ecosystems: A Mixed-Method Investigation with Interpretive Case Study and Analytical Modeling," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 508-531, June.
    6. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2014. "A game-theoretic analysis of information sharing and security investment for complementary firms," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(11), pages 1682-1691, November.
    7. Myriam Dunn Cavelty, 2018. "Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 22-30.
    8. Kay-Yut Chen & Jingguo Wang & Yan Lang, 2022. "Coping with Digital Extortion: An Experimental Study of Benefit Appeals and Normative Appeals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5269-5286, July.
    9. de Cornière, Alexandre & Taylor, Greg, 2021. "A Model of Information Security and Competition," TSE Working Papers 21-1285, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    10. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong, 2016. "A differential game approach to security investment and information sharing in a competitive environment," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(6), pages 511-526, June.
    11. Guang Zhu & Hu Liu & Mining Feng, 2018. "An Evolutionary Game-Theoretic Approach for Assessing Privacy Protection in mHealth Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-27, October.
    12. Yong Wu & Gengzhong Feng & Richard Y. K. Fung, 2018. "Comparison of information security decisions under different security and business environments," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(5), pages 747-761, May.
    13. Karthik Kannan & Rahul Telang, 2005. "Market for Software Vulnerabilities? Think Again," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 726-740, May.
    14. Xing Gao & Siyu Gong, 2022. "An economic analysis of information security outsourcing with competitive firms," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(7), pages 2748-2758, October.
    15. Alfredo Garcia & Barry Horowitz, 2007. "The potential for underinvestment in internet security: implications for regulatory policy," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 37-55, February.
    16. Masoud, Najeb & Al-Utaibi, Ghassan, 2022. "The determinants of cybersecurity risk disclosure in firms’ financial reporting: Empirical evidence," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 131-140.
    17. Meilin He & Laura Devine & Jun Zhuang, 2018. "Perspectives on Cybersecurity Information Sharing among Multiple Stakeholders Using a Decision‐Theoretic Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 215-225, February.
    18. Chul Ho Lee & Xianjun Geng & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2013. "Contracting Information Security in the Presence of Double Moral Hazard," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 295-311, June.
    19. Xinbao Liu & Xiaofei Qian & Jun Pei & Panos M. Pardalos, 2018. "Security investment and information sharing in the market of complementary firms: impact of complementarity degree and industry size," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 413-436, February.
    20. Schilling, Andreas & Werners, Brigitte, 2016. "Optimal selection of IT security safeguards from an existing knowledge base," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 318-327.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:128-:d:1612953. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.