A Blockchain-Based Secure Data Sharing Framework for Distributed Computing Environments

Authors

  • Breoks Cistra Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. Author

Keywords:

blockchain, secure data sharing, distributed computing, smart contracts, decentralized governance, data sovereignty, interoperability

Abstract

The sharing of data across distributed computing environments remains a persistent challenge because participants often operate under heterogeneous administrative domains, inconsistent security policies, and different levels of technical capability. Centralized data sharing platforms provide functional convenience but introduce single points of failure, governance bottlenecks, and concerns about unauthorized access or manipulation. Blockchain technology offers an alternative by providing a tamper-evident distributed ledger that can coordinate identity, access policy, provenance, and audit across multiple parties without requiring a single trusted intermediary. This paper presents a system-level framework for blockchain-based secure data sharing in distributed computing environments. The framework is organized around a layered architecture that separates data storage, access control, consensus, contract execution, and governance. The discussion emphasizes structural trade-offs rather than low-level cryptographic operations. It examines how permissioned and permissionless configurations affect confidentiality, scalability, robustness, and accountability. The paper also addresses incentive design, deployment sustainability, fairness, regulatory alignment, and long-term operational considerations. Through cross-domain analysis of healthcare, Internet of Things, energy trading, and scientific collaboration contexts, the paper identifies architectural principles that can guide the construction of resilient and socially legitimate data sharing infrastructures. It concludes that blockchain-based data sharing is not a universal substitute for institutional trust, but rather a coordination mechanism whose effectiveness depends on careful architectural configuration, inclusive governance, and policy coherence.

References

1. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. White paper.

2. Wood, G. (2014). Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper, 151, 1-32.

3. Zyskind, G., Nathan, O., & Pentland, A. (2015). Decentralizing privacy: Using blockchain to protect personal data. 2015 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops, 180-184.

4. Christidis, K., & Devetsikiotis, M. (2016). Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things. IEEE Access, 4, 2292-2303.

5. Huh, S., Cho, S., & Kim, S. (2017). Managing IoT devices using blockchain platform. 2017 19th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), 464-467.

6. Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (1999). Practical Byzantine fault tolerance. Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, 173-186.

7. Androulaki, E., Barger, A., Bortnikov, V., Cachin, C., Christidis, K., De Caro, A., Enyeart, D., Ferris, C., Laventman, G., Manevich, Y., Muralidharan, S., Murthy, C., Nguyen, B., Sethi, M., Singh, G., Smith, K., Sorniotti, A., Stathakopoulou, C., Vukolić, M., ... Yellick, J. (2018). Hyperledger Fabric: A distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference, 1-15.

8. Benet, J. (2014). IPFS - Content addressed, versioned, P2P file system. arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.3561.

9. Sporny, M., Longley, D., & Chadwick, D. (2019). Verifiable Credentials Data Model 1.0. W3C Recommendation.

10. Ekblaw, A., Azaria, A., Halamka, J. D., & Lippman, A. (2016). A case study for blockchain in healthcare: "MedRec" prototype for electronic health records and medical research data. 2016 IEEE 2nd Open & Big Data Conference, 25-30.

11. Xu, X., Pautasso, C., Zhu, L., Gramoli, V., Ponomarev, A., Tran, A. B., & Chen, S. (2017). A taxonomy of blockchain-based systems for architecture design. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture, 243-252.

12. Cachin, C., & Vukolić, M. (2017). Blockchain consensus protocols in the wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01873.

13. W3C DID Working Group. (2022). Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0. W3C Recommendation.

14. Cheng, R., Zhang, F., Kos, J., He, W., Hynes, N., Fedorova, N., ... Song, D. (2019). Ekiden: A platform for confidentiality-preserving, trustworthy, and performant smart contracts. 2019 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy, 185-200.

15. Ben-Sasson, E., Chiesa, A., Garman, C., Green, M., Miers, I., Tromer, E., & Virza, M. (2014). Zerocash: Decentralized anonymous payments from Bitcoin. 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 459-474.

16. Dorri, A., Kanhere, S. S., Jurdak, R., & Gauravaram, P. (2017). Blockchain for IoT security and privacy: The case study of a smart home. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops), 618-623.

17. Kim, H., Park, J., Bennis, M., & Kim, S. L. (2020). Blockchained on-device federated learning. IEEE Communications Letters, 24(6), 1279-1283.

18. Zhang, P., White, J., Schmidt, D. C., Lenz, G., & RosenbloomS. T. (2018). FHIRChain: Applying blockchain to securely and scalably share clinical data. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal, 16, 267-278.

19. Nov, O. (2018). Blockchain meets IoT: An architecture for scalable access management in IoT. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 5(2), 1184-1195.

20. Mengelkamp, E., Notheisen, B., Beer, C., Dauer, D., & Weinhardt, C. (2018). A blockchain-based smart grid: Towards sustainable local energy markets. Computer Science - Research and Development, 33(1-2), 207-214.

21. Shafagh, H., Burkhalter, L., Hithnawi, A., & Duquennoy, S. (2017). Towards blockchain-based auditable storage and sharing in IoT. Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy, 45-50.

22. Yeung, K. (2019). Regulation by blockchain: The emerging battle for supremacy between the code of law and code as law. Modern Law Review, 82(2), 207-239.

Downloads

Published

2026-04-08