A Survey on Privacy-Preserving Caching at Network Edge: Classification, Solutions, and Challenges

A request trace refers to a sequence of content requests and responses between an end device and the ES or service providers. This trace probably contains user-sensitive information such as the user’s browsing behaviour, preferences, and interests (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Cui et al., 2020c, a). User request traces are valuable assets to service providers and caching systems. Service or content providers can analyze these request traces to infer users’ behavior patterns, such as the type of websites or applications they frequently use and the content they prefer to consume. Edge servers can maintain and analyze request traces to improve caching performance by predicting future requests so as to prefetch and cache popular content in advance.

However, user request traces may expose users’ sensitive information such as user preferences (Cui et al., 2020c; Qian et al., 2020), request patterns (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Cui et al., 2020a; Acs et al., 2019; Liang and Liu, 2019) and movement patterns (Zhang et al., 2022a). Such information can be utilized by advertisers or malicious attackers to make profits or harm. There are two potential risks: interception and misuse. First, request records can be intercepted and sniffed by other users and external attackers. For example, malicious users can use timing attacks (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Acs et al., 2019) to infer historical request records of nearby users, leading to illegal advertising and cache pollution attacks (Wu et al., 2016). Second, edge servers and service providers are curious about user interest patterns who may misuse request traces for their purposes. For example, request traces can be exploited to develop trace-driven content caching algorithms, and hence users may suffer privacy infringement threats from untrusted or profit-driven third-party edge servers (Araldo et al., 2018; Cui et al., 2020c; Schlegel et al., 2022; Tong et al., 2022).

However, designing methods to preserve user privacy in edge caching systems is non-trivial. Most existing privacy-enhancing approaches fail to effectively address the privacy leakage risks confronted by users in caching systems because request records cannot be arbitrarily altered or obfuscated by users, and they must be visible to service providers and edge caching servers. Attackers can obtain user request records through various methods such as timing attacks, through which attackers pretend to be the normal user who sends content requests to the server. Then, attackers may infer user request traces by exploiting the timing difference between cached and non-cached responses (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Acs et al., 2019).

Personal information is a type of private data that can be mined to identify a specific end device or user in the network. Edge caching servers and service providers can obtain various types of personal information from users, depending on the specific context and implementation of the edge caching system. Typical examples of personal information that can be compromised in edge caching include: (1) Identifier information such as pseudonyms and IP addresses. In particular, through IP addresses, we can identify a user’s Internet Service Provider (ISP), approximate location, and other information, with which the edge cache can carry out sensitive operations, such as integrity verification (Tong et al., 2022) and cache admission control (Xue et al., 2019, 2018). (2) Device information such as the operating system, connection type, browser type, and version, which is also essential for edge nodes to provide high-performance edge caching and tailored content to users (Zhang et al., 2022c; Cui et al., 2022). (3) Account-related information such as email address, gender, age, payment, and social relation, which can be captured by the EC or service providers when a user logs in or creates an account to access the service, potentially revealing more personal privacy (Zhang et al., 2022c; Cui et al., 2020a).

Excessively exposing personal information by edge caching can result in annoying tracking and profiling. When personal information is collected, edge caching servers and service providers can create detailed profiles of users, including their browsing habits and interests. This information can be harnessed for making caching decisions, targeted advertising, or even more malicious purposes such as manipulation or discrimination (Zhang et al., 2022c; Cui et al., 2022). In addition, malicious nodes and attackers can take advantage of excessive disclosure of personal information to gain unauthorized access to user accounts (Xue et al., 2019, 2018) and pull off cache tampering attacks (Cui et al., 2022, 2020a; Tong et al., 2022), resulting in financial losses and other harms.

Location information is a critical type of privacy data carrying location, spatial coordinates, and the current time of moving objects. In edge caching systems, there are two fundamental types of location information: users’ location information and Point of Interests (POIs).

When users access edge caching systems, they may unconsciously expose private location information in the following processes: (1) A user’s geographic location can be exposed to the edge cache when accessing content or services directly from the edge (Cui et al., 2020b); (2) Content Providers (CP) and Edge Caching providers can proactively collect users’ geographic location information to provide better content distribution services, such as predicting user moving patterns (Zhang et al., 2022a); (3) In Location-Based Services (LBS), users may provide their private geographic information and POIs to search for their interests at the edge cache (Amini et al., 2011; Cui et al., 2020b; GU Yi-ming, BAI Guang-wei, SHEN Hang, 2019; Nisha et al., 2022). This information can be abused, resulting in undesired tracking and profiling or even more severe consequences, such as location-based attacks.

Location information is sensitive that can be utilized to learn an individual’s daily routine and movements. Service providers can use this information to deliver more relevant advertisements and cached content to users, potentially boosting profits. Yet, if malicious attackers obtain location information, it can put users at risk of physical harm. Malicious attackers can use location information to track a user’s movement trajectories and potentially cause harm, particularly in the case of stalking or other criminal activities.

Content cached by the edge system may reveal sensitive and private information, and therefore it is essential to protect the privacy of such content, particularly when it includes confidential information, e.g., personal and financial data, confidential business information, and government secrets. We name such sensitive cached content data as “private content”. For example, in mobile social networks, each user can be regarded as a content provider who can produce fresh content desiring that their content can be efficiently and accurately delivered to consumers (Xu et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2019). In this case, edge computing is a feasible architecture for caching and delivering the content. Consumers in proximity  (Zhang et al., 2022a; Xu et al., 2020) or with close social relations (Wang et al., 2019b) to a particular user content provider in social networks are more likely to request these content. Thereby, using an edge server to cache and deliver content in mobile social networks can diminish bandwidth costs, which however raises privacy leakage risks.

Briefly speaking, private content privacy can be infringed in several ways. First, edge servers are not trustworthy and can expose cached content to the public. Second, malicious and unauthorized users in the edge network can access cached content during transmission or processing between end users and the edge cache or between different edge caches. For instance, in cache side-channel attacks (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Liang and Liu, 2019), attackers attempt to access cached content by sending targeted requests, potentially allowing them to view sensitive information. For another instance, attackers can lodge cache tampering by injecting malicious content into the cache to exploit vulnerabilities in end-user systems or steal sensitive information (Qian et al., 2020; Cui et al., 2020a; Tong et al., 2022).

Content popularity can be defined as the relative frequency of a particular content to be requested by users. It indicates the level of popularity of content among users. The popularity information is broadly utilized in improving caching efficiency, and caching the most popular content can effectively lower the content delivery cost. However, the popularity information is sensitive, unveiling the private preference information of users (Cui et al., 2020a; Yu et al., 2022). Besides, it is possible that content popularity information can reveal sensitive information about content providers, such as their financial success and strategic direction, which should be kept confidentially (Araldo et al., 2018; Cui et al., 2020a).

The popularity information is crucial for making effective edge caching decisions. As the number of records owned by a single ES is limited, content providers may need to provide supplementary information. For example, edge caching servers can mutually exchange popularity information to optimize edge caching decisions for the entire caching system (Yu et al., 2022; Cui et al., 2020a). Yet, this practice exposes the relative popularity of different content on edge. Furthermore, when the cache is full, the ES must decide which content to be removed to save space, revealing popularity information as well (Acs et al., 2019).

Monitoring attacks, also known as eavesdrop** attacks, can be divided into two main categories:

(1) The first is sniffing attacks on network communications, i.e., an adversary sniffs on network traffic through the edge caching node to read or intercept private information in network packets (Zhang et al., 2022c). For example, the edge cache can monitor user requests during the caching service process. In other words, the edge caching operator can monitor users’ requests intended to responding end users’ requests and improve the caching efficiency. Through subsequent data analysis, edge caching managers can improve the caching efficiency and reduce the transmission delay of the requested content. However, a user request may contain private information, such as personal content preference (Cui et al., 2020c; Yuan et al., 2016; Schlegel et al., 2022), location (Zhang et al., 2022a), content popularity (Cui et al., 2020c), and other personal information (Kong et al., 2019; Xue et al., 2019, 2018). Therefore, edge caching systems should take both caching efficiency and privacy preservation into account. Entities that can implement sniffing attacks in network communications include edge caching managers (e.g., content providers (Cui et al., 2020c), location service providers (Zhang et al., 2022a), Internet services providers or based station (Yuan et al., 2016), edge devices (Zhou et al., 2019; Cui et al., 2020c; Xu et al., 2019; Schlegel et al., 2022; Tong et al., 2022)), malicious end devices (Xue et al., 2019, 2018; Cui et al., 2020c; Nikolaou et al., 2016), and external adversaries (Zhang et al., 2022c).

2) The second type of monitoring attack is supervisory attacks on cached content, i.e., attackers conduct improper monitoring, replacement, pollution, and other privacy attack activities on cached content. By leveraging the illegal cache access, adversaries can obtain private data or information such as content popularity (Araldo et al., 2018; Cui et al., 2020a; Andreoletti et al., 2019a), user preferences (Qian et al., 2020), and other private information (Cui et al., 2020a; Tong et al., 2022). If the cached content is not protected prudently, the user’s privacy can be seriously compromised by edge caches, which are often deployed by honest but curious third parties (e.g., Internet service providers (Andreoletti et al., 2019a; Araldo et al., 2018), edge servers (Cui et al., 2020a; Qian et al., 2020; Tong et al., 2022), and end devices (Cui et al., 2020a; Qian et al., 2020)).

Data mining attacks usually occur when an edge caching entity applies a learning-based caching algorithm to explore sensitive data for making caching decisions. Due to the high dynamics and complicated access patterns driven by users’ interest (Muller et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2019), designing an intelligent edge caching algorithm is essential to improve the caching performance. Commonly, learning-based methods make caching decisions by exploiting historical information to train a prediction model. It is necessary to feed the model training with private and sensitive data related to users, and thus users may be reluctant to share. Since edge caching decisions are generated by learning algorithms, edge caching becomes a trade-off problem between caching performance and privacy protection level. As a consequence, learning-based methods in edge computing-assisted caching are usually vulnerable to two types of privacy risks: (1) exploratory, in which adversaries investigate vulnerabilities (such as the training dataset, model parameters, and gradient data) without changing the training process, and 2) causative, in which attackers manipulate and inject misleading training datasets to alter the machine learning model’s training process (Tourani et al., 2018). Additionally, previous research has shown that model parameters (Shokri et al., 2017) and gradients (Abadi et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2020) of the machine learning model can be utilized to recover original sensitive and private data information. Learning-based methods provide a practical framework for making edge caching decisions but are susceptible to privacy risks that can compromise user privacy. The potential adversaries to launch data mining attacks include edge caching managers (e.g., content providers (Qiao et al., 2022; Cui et al., 2020c), Internet services providers (Wang et al., 2020), edge devices (Qiao et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022a; Liu et al., 2022)) and malicious end devices (Wang et al., 2019b).

In cache side-channel attacks, attackers can learn privacy information about users and cached content by observing and measuring activities relevant to edge caches such as response time, power consumption, and return faults (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Liang and Liu, 2019; Wu et al., 2016; Acs et al., 2019). Through the edge caching service, users can conveniently upload their content to edge servers or download requested content from edge servers. Due to the open accessibility of edge cache (Ni et al., 2021), adversaries can easily access content cached by edge servers. Adversaries can target a particular victim user by identifying content requested by the victim. The attacker may know the victim’s content consumption habits or other specific characteristics to distinguish the victim from other users. One of the main types of cache side-channel attacks is cache-timing attacks, which allows attackers to determine whether specific content has been cached by comparing response times. Previous works such as (Liang and Liu, 2019; Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Acs et al., 2019) have explored cache-timing attacks in edge caching systems. An attacker can conduct the precise timing measurement to distinguish cache hits from misses, which can identify what content is cached at the ES. A cache hit means that a nearby user has requested the content (or has a high caching value), while a cache miss means that the content has not been requested (or has been ejected from the cache). A knowledgeable attacker can further determine whether the request is served by the provider or by a router somewhere along the provider’s path (Liang and Liu, 2019). The main risk entities to launch cache side-channel attacks include malicious end devices (Liang and Liu, 2019; Acs et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2016) and external adversaries (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Zhang et al., 2022c).

A cache tampering attack is a form of cyber-attacks in which an adversary aims to alter content stored at an edge cache to gain unauthorized access, introduce illicit content and disrupt the caching system’s regular operation. Within an edge network, a caching server offers a temporary storage area, holding frequently accessed content to expedite distribution. However, cache tampering attacks can transpire when an attacker modifies content cached in the ES or deceives the user to gain unauthorized content. The main risk entities to implement cache tampering attacks include edge servers (Tong et al., 2022; Qian et al., 2020), malicious end devices (Qian et al., 2020; Cui et al., 2020a) and external adversary (Qian et al., 2020; Cui et al., 2020a).

A typical instance of cache tampering attacks is cache poisoning, where an attacker manipulates a Content Delivery Network (CDN) or edge server’s cache to store and deliver malicious content or information (Ni et al., 2021). For example, an attacker can exploit the vulnerability of the caching system by requesting a legitimate image with a specially crafted HTTP header. This header may contain malicious code that tricks the cache into storing a different image the attacker controls rather than the legitimate one. The next time when a user requests the original image, it will instead receive the attacker’s image, which could contain harmful content such as malware or phishing links.

A variant of the cache tampering attack is the cache deception attack, wherein an adversary gains access to private information by misleading and influencing a privileged user (Ni et al., 2021). This process consists of two primary steps: initially, the attacker prompts the privileged user to request sensitive content and cache it in the ES; subsequently, the adversary submits an identical request to the edge cache and retrieves the sensitive content. For example, in named data networking, an attacker creates a URL request targeting a victim user’s private content by attaching a tag of a widely-used image. The victim is then enticed to make that request using its privilege. Upon retrieval, the cloud server disregards the invalid suffix and returns legitimate privacy content. The caching node retains the privacy content as the popular image’s content. In this manner, the attacker can make the same request to access the identical privacy content in the edge cache, enabling them to acquire private content they are not authorized to access, potentially resulting in the victim’s private content being leaked. The above kinds of cache tampering attacks give rise to unbearable privacy risks for users in edge caching systems.

Noise-based methods represent the most prevalent approaches for preserving privacy within edge caching systems. These methods introduce disturbances to the real and genuine information before its exposure and interaction, effectively safeguarding privacy. Within the domain of edge caching, three specific types of methods are commonly employed: Differential Privacy (DP), confusion, and anonymization.

Differential Privacy (DP) is a data-sharing technique that allows data owners to share only some statistical characteristics of a database while withholding individual-specific information (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021; Acs et al., 2019). As shown in Fig. 3, there are two ways to add noise in the differential privacy mechanism. The traditional one is to add noise to the public database at the time of data release. However, the data collection agency is not always reliable, and thus Local Differential Privacy (LDP) mechanism is also leveraged by data owners to distort original data before submitting private data. The use of DP in edge caching systems can introduce distortion to the actual user or content information during the collection or release of sensitive data. DP is introduced to protect request traces (Zhang et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2019b; Zhou et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2022a; Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021) personal information (Zhu et al., 2021; Zeng et al., 2020), and machine learning models (Yu et al., 2022) in edge caching systems.

Confusion mainly has two ways to enhance privacy in edge caching. The first one is cache obfuscation (such as proactive cache (Qian et al., 2020; Nikolaou et al., 2016), off-path cache (Wu et al., 2016), and request hit delay (Liang and Liu, 2019)), which can be used to protect users’ requests when retrieving the content from monitoring or timing attacks in an untrusted or semi-trusted network environment. The second one is spatial confusion (Amini et al., 2011; GU Yi-ming, BAI Guang-wei, SHEN Hang, 2019; Zhang et al., 2019), which is to protect the location information when users enjoy location-based services.

Anonymous methods are the last category of privacy risk mitigation measures. Anonymity is the act of not being named or using an alias, as opposed to the act of having a real identity (Cui et al., 2020b). In particular, a set of public data satisfies $K$-anonymity if the information of any entity cannot be distinguished from at least $K-1$ other entities. $K$-anonymity method is often used to enhance geographical (Hu et al., 2018; Nisha et al., 2022; Yang and Kong, 2016) and personal privacy identity information (Sen et al., 2018; Cui et al., 2020b) in edge caching systems. Besides, the anonymity group technology is also used in protecting users’ identity information (Zhang et al., 2022c; Xue et al., 2019, 2018; Nguyen et al., 2023).

Trusted distributed computing (TDC) methods encompass three primary mitigation frameworks—Federated Learning (FL), Secret Sharing (SS), and blockchain technology—to safeguard privacy in the context of edge caching.

Federated Learning (FL) is a distributed machine learning technique that trains a learning-based algorithm across multiple decentralized devices or edge servers locally holding data samples without exposure (Brendan McMahan et al., 2017). The federated learning framework is one of the most essential methods to preserve private data during the machine learning process. It is common that the federated learning framework (Yu et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2019a, 2020; Liu et al., 2022; Yu et al., 2021, 2020; Li et al., 2020) trains learning models by exposing model parameters or gradients. Instead, traditional machine learning methods need to collect raw data for the learning process. However, model parameters or gradients are also private assets of users since attackers can infer and recover users’ private information from exposed model information. In addition, model information may have significant economic benefits, which will compromise the self-interest of model owners if they are exposed directly. A number of works (Yu et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022a; Cui et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2022a) have contributed to upgrading the federated learning framework by injecting noise or other interference to model information prior to exposure.

Secret Sharing (SS), also known as secret splitting, is a kind of secure multi-party computation and storage method in which each party gets a part of the secret, called a secret share. The secretly shared information cannot be recovered unless a sufficient number of secret shares can be collected. A single share cannot restore the original secret. For example, the $(t,n)$-threshold scheme is the most straightforward secret-sharing scheme. In this scheme, there are a total of $n$ players. Each player receives only one secret share. The secret can be recovered if at least $t$ players cooperate, but if fewer than $t$ players cooperate, where $t$ is the safety threshold parameter. SS can be introduced to protect request traces (Acs et al., 2019; Schlegel et al., 2022) and the content popularity information (Andreoletti et al., 2019b) in edge caching systems.

Blockchain is a technical solution that does not rely on third parties to carry out network data storage, verification, transmission, and communication through its own distributed nodes. As Fig. 4 shows, the blockchain mechanism can automate these four steps: (1) When a new blockchain transaction occurs, all participants can competitively record that transaction as a data block. (2) Following the rule of consensus, most participants on the blockchain network must vote for a valid recorded transaction. Depending on the type of network, the consensus mechanism of agreement can vary but is typically established at the start of the network. (3) Once participants have reached a consensus, transactions on the blockchain are written into blocks appended to a cryptographic hash that links blocks together as a chain. (4) The blockchain system finally updates and broadcasts a copy of the latest ledger to all participants. Blockchain can be used to enhance the protection of user preferences (Qian et al., 2020), personal information (Lei et al., 2020; Dai et al., 2020; Vu et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2020), and machine learning data (Cui et al., 2022) in edge caching systems.

Cryptology-based methods, as a vital category of mitigation approaches, play a significant role in preserving privacy within edge caching systems. These methods employ cryptographic techniques to safeguard sensitive content or information, ensuring confidentiality, integrity, and authentication. Within the realm of edge caching, three specific types of methods are leveraged: encryption communication, Homomorphic Encryption (HE), and Privacy-preserving Information Retrieval (PIR).

Encryption communication is divided into two steps to protect the security and privacy of communication data. The first step is to encrypt communication data as follows. The sender encrypts the content by an encryption algorithm and the receiver’s public key to obtain the ciphertext. The receiver, once getting the ciphertext, conducts decryption through the decryption algorithm and the private key to recover the original data. Encryption communication is commonly used to protect the security of user request records and other data in Internet communications. There are three main approaches for encryption in edge privacy-enhanced caching systems. One is symmetric encryption, which mainly uses Data Encryption Standard (DES), Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) (Pu et al., 2019; Yuan et al., 2016), or Searchable Encryption (SE) (Cui et al., 2020a). Second, asymmetric encryption mainly includes Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) (Xu et al., 2019), Attribute-Based Encryption (ABE) (Pu et al., 2019), and Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) (Zhang et al., 2022c; Cui et al., 2020c). Finally, there are hashing algorithms (Xue et al., 2019, 2018; Xu et al., 2019), which are sometimes used in blockchain (Cui et al., 2022; Lei et al., 2020). However, there are also three significant concerns with the use of cryptographic methods in edge caching systems. Firstly, due to the existence of encryption, third-party edge cache often cannot directly use encrypted requests to retrieve related content, which may lead to the unavailability of edge cache. Secondly, introducing encryption technology may pose computational pressure on the resource-constrained edge and end devices. Lastly, encryption communication may fail to prevent record privacy from content providers or service providers, who have the key to decrypt request information. Therefore, how to introduce cryptology-based techniques into edge caching systems is still a challenging problem. In addition, as a special communication encryption method, the digital signature (Kong et al., 2019; Chen et al., 2022a; Jiang et al., 2020) is often used in the edge cache to verify user identity and data reliability.

Homomorphic Encryption (HE) is a form of encryption by which each party co-computes the result of a specific objective function concerning their private data without a Trusted Third Party (TTP). Each party cannot unveil private data from other parties even if the computation is completed. In other words, it allows a participant to perform operations such as searching and multiplying encrypted data to produce correct results without decrypting it during calculation. HE can be used to protect user preferences (Cui et al., 2020c) and information (Kong et al., 2019) when searching the edge cache.

Privacy Information Retrieval (PIR) is mainly used to protect a user’s request record information (Tong et al., 2022; Kumar et al., 2019) in the edge caching system. When obtaining sensitive data, request records likely expose important privacy information of users. PIR can help users with query needs to complete private data retrieval from the edge cache under the condition that the query privacy information is not leaked. In other words, the PIR technology can prevent attackers from obtaining precise query information and content items in cache retrieval or other sensitive queries. At the same time, PIR can let users obtain desired private content.

Optimization-based methods and access control are the other two main methods to enhance the effectiveness of privacy protection in edge caching systems. In optimization-based methods, metrics such as privacy exposure and credibility are mathematically modeled. Then, the quantified metrics are regarded as the objective function or constraint variables of a cache optimization problem. Ultimately, the optimization problem is solved to obtain optimal privacy protection decisions. Access control is an enforcing control method that allows or denies a user’s access to a specific network resource, e.g., private content in the edge cache, based on the user’s account or group. Without a defined authorization mechanism, access to system resources will have no restrictions, and thus illegal device operations can be easily launched. The edge cache can implement strict access control to filter out unauthorized or illegal accesses into the caching space for privacy protection. Access control methods have been applied to protect personal information (Lei et al., 2020; Cui et al., 2020a; Zhang et al., 2022c) and content privacy (Xue et al., 2019, 2018) in edge caching systems. In the next section, we dive into the details of defence methods for protecting each type of sensitive privacy.

The initial class of methods to protect request records are noise-based methods. There are mainly two ways. The first one is to add noises generated by a mechanism such as Differential Privacy (DP) to protect information (Zhang et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2019b; Zhu et al., 2021; Zeng et al., 2020, 2021; Guo et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2017). The second one is cache obfuscation methods (such as proactive cache (Qian et al., 2020; Nikolaou et al., 2016), off-path cache (Wu et al., 2016) and request hit delay (Liang and Liu, 2019)), which protect users’ requests when retrieving content from the monitoring or timing attacks in an untrusted or semi-trusted network environment. In the following, we will elaborate on these methods, orderly.

The second category of trusted distributed computing methods aim at safeguarding request records primarily comprises Secret Sharing (SS), a secure multi-party computation technique, that can effectively prevent attackers from acquiring valued request records. Acs et al. (Acs et al., 2019) proposed two timing attack defence methods for the edge router cache in the ICN network. For interactive traffic-type communication, random naming and secret sharing are used for privacy protection to prevent attackers from obtaining specific traffic information. In view of the content distribution traffic, a method of increasing artificial delay is proposed to protect privacy, and a certain delay is added to the private content that is hit by the router cache to prevent adversaries from determining the hit status of private-sensitive content.

Cryptology-based methods have been widely used to protect the security and privacy of user request records and other information in Internet communications. However, there are also three challenging problems when using cryptographic methods to protect the privacy of request records in edge caching systems. Firstly, due to the existence of encryption, third-party edge cache probably cannot directly use encrypted requests to retrieve related content, leading to the unavailability of edge cache (Yuan et al., 2016; Leguay et al., 2017). Secondly, introducing encryption technology may pose heavy computational pressure on the resource-constrained edge and end devices. Lastly, cryptology-based methods fail to prevent the leakage of record privacy from content providers or service providers, who have the key to decrypt requests. Therefore, how to apply cryptology-based techniques to edge caching systems is still a challenging problem.

Other methods, such as Optimization-based methods, are also introduced to enhance the privacy of request traces or user preferences in EC. Sivaraman et al. (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021) used game theory to formulate an off-path and cooperative caching problem in the edge of ICN, where users can choose their optimal routers in the edge network to cached content. Constraints in the problem include network latency, caching cost, and the amount of exposed user privacy. Two different privacy measures (i.e., conditional entropy and differential privacy) are used as constraints in the work. Finally, it is proved that a Nash equilibrium point exists in the game, which can be solved by an iterative method.

Furthermore, Cao et al. (Cao et al., 2020) studied the reliable and efficient performance of multimedia transmission services between Base Stations (BS) and MUs through a two-stage joint optimization. In the first stage of optimization, a service reliability evaluation mechanism is designed to evaluate the credibility of BS to ensure the security of user privacy information. Then, the price and reliability competition among BSes and the strategic interaction of all players are modelled by the Stackelberg game (He et al., 2007). A resource allocation problem is further proposed in the second stage to coordinate multiple MUs serving on the same BS. The potential game model is used to improve the transmission service performance. Additionally, Shi et al. (Shi et al., 2018) proposed a model for the cache placement problem in wireless edge caching, considering a multi-attacker scenario where both benign users’ and attackers’ locations follow a homogeneous Poisson Point Process (PPP). An optimization problem is formulated to determine the probability of each caching file, considering the average probability of successful eavesdropper attacks and transmissions in the wireless edge network. Finally, the genetic algorithm is used to maximize the secure transmission performance of the system.

Previous works mainly employ blockchain to protect users’ identity information (Lei et al., 2020; Dai et al., 2020; Vu et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2020). Specifically, Vu et al. (Vu et al., 2019) proposed a blockchain-based CDN (B-CDN) architecture for content delivery, which enables anonymous operations on users. The B-CDN leverages intelligent contracts to maintain the blockchain and provide CPs with users’ registration and subscription functions while ensuring user privacy. Additionally, the B-CDN can reduce the cost of CP management by utilizing a public database of requested traces, which allows CPs to estimate users’ preferences with virtual identities and maximize the efficiency of their caching services.

Named Data Network (NDN) is a variant of the ICN, where content can be retrieved by the content name. Lei et al. (Lei et al., 2020) introduced a blockchain-based security architecture for improving the security and privacy of NDN-based vehicular edge computing systems. This work deploys blockchain nodes in edge servers and ISP nodes, where a delegated consensus algorithm is designed to enhance the efficiency of the blockchain. A three-layer management framework and an access control strategy are proposed for key management based on blockchain verification and vehicle attributes, respectively. A resource requester needs to prove to blockchain consensus nodes that it satisfies the access condition according to the access policy of the resource owner.

Dai et al. (Dai et al., 2020) designed a content caching mechanism based on the permissioned blockchain technology to address the problem of privacy and security in the vehicle edge computing network. A new block validator selection method is proposed to achieve a fast and efficient blockchain consensus mechanism. In addition, this work presents a deep reinforcement learning-based vehicle content caching algorithm.

Liu et al. (Liu et al., 2020) designed a decentralized caching framework empowered with blockchain credentials to tackle the challenges of content data verification and edge device authentication. In the designed system, it is possible to trace each transaction in an active edge network without a central manager. A cache order matching technique is devised to use the cache resources efficiently. Further, data integrity verification is done with the help of a content trading mechanism which helps data sharing among the edge devices of the edge network and ensures the efficiency of trading in the edge cashing system.

The access control is also exploited to protect users’ identity information (Nguyen et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2022c; Xue et al., 2019, 2018). In (Xue et al., 2019, 2018), Xue et al. proposed a secure and efficient network access framework (SEAF) for cache resources at the edge of ICN. The SEAF provides several security and privacy features, including content confidentiality, user privacy protection, user privilege revocation, countability, and efficiency. In SEAF, routers at the network edge authenticate user requests to separate access control from content provisioning. Only authenticated requests can enter the network; thus, authorized users can only access the bandwidth and cache resources inside the ICN. Meanwhile, to protect privacy, users can verify their identity to the edge router by generating a valid group signature, thereby maintaining users’ anonymity to the edge router. Zhang et al.  (Zhang et al., 2022c) focused on the security issues of cache-based software-defined networks, using the Tesla protocol to achieve fast authentication of the cache of vehicles and fog nodes. Besides, the Pedersen commitment mechanism is used to directly authenticate vehicles and fog nodes without exposing user identity privacy. Considering the limited computing power and delay-sensitive characteristics of the IoV, the author designed a set of cryptographic mechanisms supporting batch verification.

As such, noise-based methods are mainly introduced to protect location privacy, including geographic differential privacy (Zhang et al., 2022a), Spatial Confusion (Amini et al., 2011; GU Yi-ming, BAI Guang-wei, SHEN Hang, 2019; Zhang et al., 2019), $k$-anonymity (Cui et al., 2020b; Nisha et al., 2022; Yang and Kong, 2016; Sen et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019), etc.

To enhance the Quality of Service (QoS), CPs collaborate with ISPs to deploy edge caching resources as close to the users as possible. ISPs can support edge cache by placing Virtual Servers (VSes) at the network’s edge and assigning them to CPs. However, CPs only possess the request records of users, while ISPs only have access to their geographic location information. In the caching process, CPs do not want to disclose all the requested information to the ISPs, and vice versa. To deal with this challenge, Andreoletti et al. (Andreoletti et al., 2018) proposed a secure multi-party computation protocol to facilitate cooperation between ISPs and CPs without requiring either party to disclose sensitive information. The protocol enables ISPs to obtain the number of requests for specific video content in a given area at a low computational cost. Once the ISP has this information, it can deploy VSes efficiently, and the CP can use these VSes to place the edge cache, thereby minimizing the number of hops for content delivery and reducing communication delays.

Despite the comprehensive introduction of major solutions, our discussion is not exhaustive. Thus, we provide a supplementary introduction Table 3, briefly introducing other solutions to protect user privacy in edge caching systems that have not been discussed in detail in Section 4.

Digital content can be easily copied and distributed, which is a double-edged sword making content-right confirmation difficult. For instance, when social media content cached on a particular edge server is accessed by other edge servers, the edge server completely loses control of cached social media content because other edge servers can easily copy and redistribute this social media content (Araldo et al., 2018; Cui et al., 2020a; Yuan et al., 2016). Content-right confirmation is essential for content owners to maintain availability and accountability when using edge caching services to preserve content privacy. On the one hand, with content-right confirmation, it is easy to determine content ownership. Privacy strategies can be implemented to ensure that only authorized parties can access the content cached in an edge server. On the other hand, content-right confirmation is the basis of content accountability. With content-right confirmation, the content right can be authenticated when the content is used once, with the right changed accordingly.

However, realizing content-right confirmation in edge caching systems is non-trivial due to several challenges. First, the distributed nature of edge caching systems makes it difficult to maintain a centralized and trusted authority for content ownership verification. Second, edge nodes’ dynamic and heterogeneous nature introduces complexity in implementing content-right confirmation mechanisms, which must be scalable and adaptable to different edge devices. Furthermore, the use of encryption and privacy-enhancing technologies in edge caching systems further complicates content-right confirmation. While these technologies are essential for protecting the privacy of cached content, they may also prevent content owners from verifying the use of their content in the cache.

The challenges of realizing content-right confirmation in edge caching systems call for future work in several directions. Firstly, new verification mechanisms are needed that can handle the distributed nature, dynamics, and heterogeneity of edge nodes. To overcome these challenges, several approaches have been proposed in the literature, such as blockchain-based solutions (Lei et al., 2020; Vu et al., 2019). However, these mechanisms are short in scalability and the ability to adapt to different edge devices. Additionally, privacy-preserving verification methods that can coexist with encryption and other privacy-enhancing techniques should be explored. One possible solution is to leverage secure multi-party computation (Andreoletti et al., 2018) to enable verification while preserving the privacy of cached content. Finally, standardization efforts are needed to ensure interoperability between different edge caching systems and content providers. For example, the trust management mechanisms (Zhong et al., 2021; Xu et al., 2019) are proposed to enable content-right confirmation in ISP and D2D edge caching, respectively. Thus, promoting the adoption of content-right confirmation mechanisms and facilitating the collaboration between different stakeholders in different edge caching scenarios need to be further discussed.

Collaborative edge caching is essential for enhancing QoS. However, many edge caches are deployed on leased nodes provided by profit-oriented third-party providers, which are often decentralized (Cui et al., 2020a), unreliable (Leguay et al., 2017) or self-interested (Cui et al., 2020a). For instance, edge caching routers can be unreliable (Leguay et al., 2017; Cui et al., 2020a) in CDN, while RSUs and vehicles can be semi-trust (Qian et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2022c; Hu et al., 2018; Jiang et al., 2020) or self-interested (Dai et al., 2020; Cui et al., 2020c; Kong et al., 2019) in the edge IoV caching network. Similarly, in social media networks, edge servers can be self-interested (Xu et al., 2019, 2020). To enable privacy-preserving applications and technology cooperation among edge caching systems, coalition mechanisms are required. These mechanisms involve designing an incentive and allocation model that encourages participants in edge caching systems to join the coalition and maximize their benefits through a reasonable selection. Additionally, punishment mechanisms should also be considered when there are untrustworthy or dishonest nodes in the system. Hence, incentive and allocation mechanisms can be designed in a thoughtful manner to foster participation and cooperation among edge caching systems.

However, designing coalition mechanisms for PPEC is complicated because it is necessary to balance several conflicting objectives. On the one hand, the mechanisms should encourage participants to contribute their resources to the coalition, ensuring that the costs and benefits of participants are distributed fairly (Andreoletti et al., 2018). On the other hand, they must incentivize participants to prioritize the interests of the coalition over their individual interests and punish illegal strategies (Xu et al., 2020), which is challenging when participants are profit-oriented with conflicting goals (Xu et al., 2019).

Game theory is a powerful mathematical framework for investigating decision-making processes, and interactions among rational individuals or entities in coalition mechanisms. Its applications can optimize edge caching, capturing interactions between content providers, network operators and end users. Various game-theoretic models such as the non-cooperative game (Sivaraman and Sikdar, 2021), Stackelberg game (Xu et al., 2019, 2020; Cao et al., 2020), coalition games and potential games (Cao et al., 2020) can analyze the interaction among participants in edge caching systems. For instance, in a Stackelberg game, one player acts as the leader while the others follow. In the context of edge caching, the content provider can be modeled as the leader, while network caching operators are the followers (Xu et al., 2020). Similarly, the edge cache can act as the leader, followed by end users (Xu et al., 2019). Nevertheless, game theory-based approaches with complete information (Xu et al., 2019, 2020) can not be directly applied in privacy-preserving scenarios since the information is likely incomplete to players in edge caching systems. Besides, it is impractical to assume that every player is benign in an open-access edge network. There may exist semi-honest and even malicious players. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct further investigations into the coalition mechanisms when analyzing the complex interactions between different kinds of players in collaborative PPEC.

Online learning has become increasingly popular for solving complex problems in various fields, including edge caching in dynamic network environments (Krishnendu et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2022b; Chen et al., 2022b; Cui et al., 2023). However, traditional edge caching algorithms often rely on pre-determined and non-optimal edge caching policies in dynamic network environments where network conditions (Zhang et al., 2022b) and user behaviour (Ma et al., 2017) can change rapidly over time. Besides, in a real network system, the access pattern of resources is highly dynamic (Zhang et al., 2022d). Some existing works proposed to spend a high cost to train the machine learning model, which may not be acceptable for resource-constrained edge or terminal devices (Cui et al., 2023). At the same time, user interests, geographical locations, or IoT device connectivity in edge scenarios are highly dynamic, where one-time trained models may not adapt well to such scenarios (Chen et al., 2022b).

Unfortunately, online learning algorithms can also pose a risk to user privacy when collecting and processing sensitive user data. Several open challenges exist in privacy-preserving online learning algorithms. One challenge is to balance the privacy protection strength and the accuracy of the model prediction. The decision-making process in online scenarios is already highly challenging, and the introduction of privacy protection methods, such as noise perturbation, can further compromise the algorithm’s performance or even make it unusable. Another challenge is to develop privacy-preserving algorithms that are computationally efficient and can be easily deployed in dynamic network environments. Therefore, how to safely use the latest historical information to make efficient online caching decisions is a problem worthy of discussion. There are little efforts to address the privacy concerns associated with online learning algorithms. The FL may be a possible framework to allow multiple parties to process data jointly without revealing their raw datasets in dynamic scenarios (Krishnendu et al., 2022). Additionally, differential privacy techniques can be used to add random noises to the data in dynamic caching environments to obscure individual information (Zhou et al., 2023).