AI Code Platforms

AI Code Platforms — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Fatsecret

  Fatsecret, commonly styled as fatsecret, is a mobile application, website and API that helps people achieve their weight loss goals and find accurate nutrition information. It also offers a weight loss clinic with coaching and medically supported programs. The platform powers global health apps. == History == Fatsecret was founded in 2006 in Melbourne, Australia by Lenny Moses and Rodney Moses. As of 2019, Lenny serves as the company's CEO. The company is known for its calorie counting and meal tracking app, and by April 2016, the company claimed to have 45 million users of its services. In August 2018, a premium version of its app was released. Since August 2009, the company has operated the Fatsecret Platform API, which allows access to its global food and nutrition database. Fatsecret reportedly had 900,000 downloads of its app in January 2020. In an analysis of several Health & Fitness app subcategories for the United States in January 2021, Fatsecret was reported to have the highest 30 day user retention rate of top Calorie Counter + Meal Planner for Weight Loss apps.

  Read more →
• 

  PitchYaGame

  PitchYaGame or #PitchYaGame (sometimes abbreviated to PYG) is a volunteer movement hosted on the social media platform Twitter to showcase, and present awards for, independent video games from around the world. == Description == PitchYaGame is hosted on the social media platform Twitter to showcase independent video games from around the world. Video pitches are presented by developers in June and November each year, and use the hashtag #PitchYaGame to identify and reference news about the showcase and the individual pitches, and the presentation of awards. The showcase was founded in May 2020 by Liam Twose, with the mission of recognising independent video games, and "focused on empowering indie game developers to strengthen their position in the industry." Twose has made clear that PitchYaGame is a showcase and not a hardcore competition, with "[j]ust enough of a push to make sure people put their best pitch forward." The team now comprises Twose (@LiamTwose at Twitter), operations manager "Indie Game Lover" (@IndieGameLover), and host Sarah Clancy (@ImSarahNow). The pitches were originally made monthly, with entries split into a number of categories, but this proved unmanageable. PitchYaGame collaborator, Sarah Clancy reported that judging the many entries on a monthly basis was "difficult and unwieldy." Therefore, pitches were later switched to six monthly, "feature creep" was reduced, and awards streamlined into gold, silver, bronze, runners-up, and most viral. == Sponsorship == In June 2021, PitchYaGame prizes were sponsored by Xsolla, and in November 2021 by Aurora Punks and Cold Pixel. No cash prizes were available in 2022, as the organisers moved PitchYaGame into a less-competitive, "more showcase centric format". == Reception == In October 2020, Elijah Beahm at The Escapist wrote that "One of the greatest challenges for any game is landing a solid pitch. You have to sell people, maybe even a publisher, to take your idea seriously. Most of the time, it's an obfuscated process that leaves the average developer scratching their heads, but Liam Twose and his team behind #PitchYaGame, 'PYG' for short, are looking to change all that with some clever social engineering." In March 2021, Cameron Koch at GameSpot wrote that "Using the #PitchYaGame, thousands of indie developers tweeted out pitches for their games on November 2 as part of a social media contest, and the results are astounding." He went on to say that "There is no arguing with the results. According to Twose, around 1100-1300 games were shared with the hashtag, and some real gems look to have shined through." In November 2021, Stafano "Stef" Castelli at IGN Italia wrote that "I myself enjoyed 'browsing through' the competitors, discovering a handful of intriguing video games in development." (translated from Italian). In November 2022, Eric Bartelson at Premortem Games wrote that "It's a great way to get games noticed by fellow developers, but also publishers, investors and press." In June 2023, Mark Plunkett in Kotaku wrote about the impossibility of keeping up with all the video game releases, and described PitchYaGame, which has attracted over 10,000 pitches since 2020, as an "astoundingly simple idea" that has "become an increasingly useful spot to catch up on some excellent-looking games that we may have otherwise completely slept on."

  Read more →
• 

  Shorty Awards

  The Shorty Awards (also known as "The Shortys") are awards for outstanding and innovative work in digital and social media content by brands, advertising agencies, and creators. The awards, which generally focus on short-term content, honor achievements in content creation on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, and other social networking sites. The Shorty Awards began in 2008 and initially recognized achievements by independent creators on Twitter, with the first formal awards ceremony occurring in February 2009. Since then, the awards, which are now awarded each spring, have shifted their focus to recognize content across numerous platforms. Entrant work is judged on the merits of excellence in creativity, strategy, and engagement by the Real Time Academy, a group of industry professionals selected by the Shorty Awards on the basis of their professional reputations, industry knowledge, and personal achievements (which may include previous Shorty wins). An additional public voting component, known as Audience Honor Voting, is also used to select Shorty Awards contenders. Notable Shorty Award winners include Malala Yousafzai, Trevor Noah, Michelle Obama, Conan O’Brien, Lady Gaga, Bill Nye, Jacob Reed, and Lizzo. Brands and organizations such as Chipotle, Duolingo, Marvel Studios, HBO, Red Bull, Airbnb, Nestle, BMW, UNICEF and the Human Rights Campaign have also been awarded. The Shorty Awards also produces an annual award program called The Shorty Impact Awards, a competition dedicated to showcasing digital and social media-based projects by brands, agencies, and organizations that seek to make the world a better place. == List of ceremonies == == 1st Shorty Awards == The awards were created in 2008 by tech entrepreneurs Greg Galant, Adam Varga, and Lee Semel of Sawhorse Media. They invited Twitter account holders to nominate the best Twitter users in general categories such as humor, news, food, and design. Winners were chosen by more than 30,000 Twitter users during the voting period. The founders of Twitter first heard about the awards after the contest had gotten underway and expressed support for it. The first Shorty Awards ceremony was held on February 11, 2009, at the Galapagos Art Space in Brooklyn, New York. Approximately 300 people attended the event. The event was hosted by CNN anchor Rick Sanchez and featured appearances by prominent Twitter users MC Hammer and Gary Vaynerchuk and a video appearance by Shaquille O'Neal. The awards, in 26 categories, were voted on by Twitter users. == 2nd Shorty Awards == Voting for the second Shorty Awards opened in January 2010 in 26 official categories. A Real-Time Photo of the Year category was added to the list of official categories for the first time, recognizing the best photo posted to services such as Twitpic, Yfrog, or Facebook. The second Shorty Awards competition introduced a panel of judges called the Real-Time Academy of Short Form Arts & Sciences whose members were Craig Newmark, David Pogue, Kurt Andersen, Caterina Fake, Joi Ito, Frank Moss, Alberto Ibargüen, Sreenath Sreenivasan, MC Hammer, Alyssa Milano and Jimmy Wales. After public nominations determined the finalists, the academy decided on the winners. Winners were announced at a ceremony held in the Times Center in The New York Times building in Manhattan that was also streamed online. The ceremony was hosted by CNN anchor Rick Sanchez, who presented awards in the official categories as well as the newly added Real-Time Photo of the Year and a special humanitarian award. == 3rd Shorty Awards == The nomination period for the third annual Shorty Awards opened in January 2011 and ran through February 11, 2011, except for new categories that had extended nomination deadlines. There were 30 official categories and five special categories. In addition to Real-Time Photo of the Year, for the first time the awards accepted nominations for Foursquare Mayor of the Year, Foursquare Location of the Year, Microblog of the Year on Tumblr, and a Connecting People award. The awards also introduced new Shorty Industry Awards to recognize the best uses of social media by brands and agencies. Winners were announced at a ceremony on March 28, 2011, hosted by Aasif Mandvi in the Times Center. Other Shorty Awards presenters were scheduled to include Kiefer Sutherland, Jerry Stiller, Anne Meara, Stephen Wallem, Miss USA Rima Fakih, and Miss Teen USA Kamie Crawford. == 4th Shorty Awards == The 4th Annual Shorty Awards featured Ricky Gervais and Tiffani Thiessen. 1.6 million tweeted nominations were made across all the categories to honor the top users on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Foursquare, YouTube and other internet platforms. == 5th Shorty Awards == The 5th Annual Shorty Awards ceremony featured Felicia Day, James Urbaniak, Kristian Nairn, Hannibal Buress, Carrie Keagan, Chris Hardwick, David Karp and Coco Rocha. 2.4 million tweeted nominations were made across all the categories to honor the top users on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Foursquare, YouTube and other internet sites. == 6th Shorty Awards == The ceremony took place on April 7, 2014, at the New York TimesCenter and was hosted by Comedian Natasha Leggero. The show included appearances by Patton Oswalt, Jamie Oliver, Kristen Bell, Jerry Seinfeld, Moshe Kasher, Julie Klausner, Erin Brady, Guy Kawasaki, Matt Walsh, Retta, Us the Duo, Big Boi, Gilbert Gottfried, Thomas Middleditch, Billie Jean King and Leandra Medine. Winners included Jerry Seinfeld and Will Ferrell. == 7th Shorty Awards == The Seventh Annual Shorty Awards was hosted by comedian Rachel Dratch and took place on April 20, 2015, at The Times Center in NYC. The Real-Time Academy, the judging body of the Shortys, tripled in size for the 7th annual Awards and included Alton Brown, Mamrie Hart, Nikki Glaser, OK Go, The Fine Bros, Debbie Sterling, Dan Savage, Deena Varshavskaya and Palmer Luckey. Panic! at the Disco was the musical guest at the ceremony. On-stage presenters included Kevin Jonas, Bill Nye, Bella Thorne, Wyclef Jean, Emily Kinney and Tyler Oakley. == 8th Shorty Awards == The Eighth Annual Shorty Awards were held in NYC at the TimesCenter on April 11, 2016. They were hosted by YouTuber, Writer and Comedian Mamrie Hart with musical performances from Nico & Vinz. Winners of the night included Bill Wurtz, DJ Khaled, Misty Copeland, Casey Neistat, Dwayne Johnson, Hannah Hart, Troye Sivan, Baddie Winkle, Kevin Hart, Taraji P. Henson, King Bach, and Zach King. == 9th Shorty Awards == The Ninth Annual Shorty Awards were held in NYC at the PlayStation Theater on April 23, 2017. They were hosted by two-time Emmy Award winner Tony Hale with a musical performance by Lizzo. Winners of the night included Bill Nye, Shay Mitchell, Doug the Pug, Gigi Gorgeous, Simone Biles, Mara Wilson, Gaten Matarazzo and Chrissy Teigen. == 10th Shorty Awards == The 10th Annual Shorty Awards, took place on April 15, 2018, at the PlayStation Theater, New York City. The ceremony was hosted by actress, singer, and songwriter Keke Palmer with a musical performance by Betty Who. == 11th Shorty Awards == The 11th Annual Shorty Awards were held on May 5, 2019, in New York City at the PlayStation Theater. The ceremony was hosted by American actress and comedian Kathy Griffin, with a musical performance by Tank and the Bangas. == 12th Shorty Awards == The 12th Annual Shorty Awards were held on May 3, 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the ceremony took place online for the first time, with presenters and award winners filming from their own homes. The ceremony was hosted by actor J.B. Smoove and featured a remixed performance of Trap Queen by Fetty Wap. Award winners included Jack Stauber, Supercar Blondie, Rose and Rosie, and Greta Thunberg. == 13th Shorty Awards == The 13th Annual Shorty Awards took place from April 26 to May 14, 2021. The ceremony was hosted on different social media platforms, such as Instagram and Clubhouse, to create a more tailored experience. Winners were announced from May 11 to May 14, with 10 winners being revealed each hour from 1 to 4 p.m. EST on the Shorty Awards Instagram account. == 14th Shorty Awards == The 14th Annual Shorty Awards were held virtually on May 15, 2022, honoring the best in social media and digital content. Hosted by Jay Shetty, the event recognized influencers, brands, and organizations across various categories, celebrating excellence in digital storytelling and innovative online campaigns. Notable winners included Tabitha Brown for her food content and the D'Amelio Family for their contributions to family and parenting content. The event highlighted the role of digital media in connecting and inspiring audiences during challenging times. == 15th Shorty Awards == The 15th Annual Shorty Awards celebrated the best in social media and digital content on May 24, 2023, at Tribeca 360° in New York City. Hosted by Jay Pharoah, the event honored creators, brands, and organizations ac

  Read more →
• 

  Sex differences in social media use

  Men and women use social media in different ways and with different frequencies. In general, several researchers have found that women tend to use social network services (SNSs) more than men and primiarly to socialize. == Differences == === Predilection for usage === Many studies have found that women are more likely to use either specific SNSs such as Facebook or MySpace or SNSs in general. In 2015, 73% of online men and 80% of online women used social networking sites. The gap in gender differences has become less apparent in LinkedIn. In 2015 about 26 percent of online men and 25% of online women used the business-and employee-oriented networking site. Researchers who have examined the gender of users of multiple SNSs have found contradictory results. Hargittai's groundbreaking 2007 study examining race, gender, and other differences between undergraduate college student users of SNSs found that women were not only more likely to have used SNSes than men but that they were also more likely to have used many different services, including Facebook, MySpace, and Friendster; these differences persisted in several models and analyses. Although she only surveyed students at one institution – the University of Illinois at Chicago – Hargittai selected that institution intentionally as "an ideal location for studies of how different kinds of people use online sites and services." In contrast, data collected by the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that men were more likely to have multiple SNS profiles. Although the sample sizes of the two surveys are comparable – 1,650 Internet users in the Pew survey compared with 1,060 in Hargittai's survey – the data from the Pew survey are newer and arguably more representative of the entire adult United States population. Pinterest, Facebook, and Instagram attract more females. Picture sharing sites overall are very popular among women. Pinterest alone attracts three times as many female users than male. However, use of Pinterest by men has increased from 5% in 2012. Facebook attracts about 77% of women online. Instagram is also more likely to attract women. Men are more likely to participate in online forums like Reddit, Digg or Slashdot. One in five men claim to be a part of an online forum. === Uses === In general, women seem to use SNSs more to explicitly foster social connections. A study conducted by Pew research centers found that women were more avid users of social media. In November 2010, the gap between men and women was as high as 15%. Female participants in a multi-stage study conducted in 2007 to discover the motivations of Facebook users scored higher on scales for social connection and posting of photographs. Studies have also been conducted on the differences between females and males with regards to blogging. The Pew Research Center found that younger females are more likely to blog than males their own age, even males that are older than them. Similarly, in a study of blogs maintained in MySpace, women were found to be more likely to not only write blogs but also write about family, romantic relationships, friendships, and health in those blogs. A study of Swedish SNS users found that women were more likely to have expressions of friendship, specifically in the areas of (a) publishing photos of their friends, (b) specifically naming their best friends, and (c) writing poems to and about their friends. Women were also more likely to have expressions related to family relationships and romantic relationships. One of the key findings of this research is that those men who do have expressions of romantic relationships in their profile had expressions just as strong as the women. However, the researcher speculated that this may be in part due to a desire to publicly express heterosexual behaviors and mannerisms instead of merely expressing romantic feelings. A large-scale study of gender differences in MySpace found that both men and women tended to have a majority of female Friends, and both men and women tended to have a majority of female "Top" Friends in the site. A later study found women to author disproportionately many (public) comments in MySpace, but an investigation into the role of emotion in public MySpace comments found that women both give and receive stronger positive emotion. It was hypothesised that women are simply more effective at using social networking sites because they are better able to harness positive emotion. A study focused on the influence of gender and personality on individuals' use of online social networking websites such as Facebook, reported that men use social networking sites with the intention of forming new relationships, whereas, women use them more for relationship maintenance. In addition to this, women are more likely to use Facebook or MySpace to compare themselves to others and also to search for information. Men, however, are more likely to look at other people's profiles with in the intention to find friends. Women were less successful at actually finding new friends, but more successful at "maintaining existing relationships, making new relationships, using for academic purposes and following specific agenda". Similarly, men also self-reported this motivation "while women reported using them more for relationship maintenance". === Personality === OCEAN personality traits are known to systematically vary between human males and females. In one study, the same women were more extraverted and agreeable, such as less neurotic while on social media than offline. Other studies associated neuroticism with female use of social media. === Privacy === Privacy has been the primary topic of many studies of SNS users, and many of these studies have found differences between male and female SNS users, although some studies have found results contradictory to those found in other studies. Some researchers have found that women are more protective of their personal information and more likely to have private profiles. Other researchers have found that women are less likely to post some types of information. Acquisti and Gross found that women in their sample were less likely to reveal their sexual orientation, personal address, or cell phone number. This is similar to Pew Internet & American Life research of children users of SNSs that found that boys and girls presented different views of privacy and behaviors, with girls being more concerned about and restrictive of information such as city, town, last name, and cell phone number that could be used to locate them. At least one group of researchers has found that women are less likely to share information that "identifies them directly – last name, cell phone number, and address or home phone number," linking that resistance to women's greater concerns about "cyberstalking", "cyberbullying", and security problems. Despite these concerns about privacy, researchers have found that women are more likely to maintain up-to-date photos of themselves. Further, Kolek and Saunders found in their sample of college student Facebook users that women were more likely to not only post a photograph of themselves in their profile but that they were more likely to have a publicly viewable Facebook account (a contradictory finding compared to many other studies), post photos, and post photo albums. Women were more likely to have: (a) a publicly viewable Facebook account, (b) more photo albums, (c) more photos, (d) a photo of themselves as their profile picture, (e) positive references to alcohol, partying, or drugs, and (f) more positive references to or about the institution or institution-related activities. In general, women were more likely to disclose information about themselves in their Facebook profile, with the primary exception of sharing their telephone number. Similarly, female respondents to Strano's study were more likely to keep their profile photo recent and choose a photo that made them appear attractive, happy, and fun-loving. Citing several examples, Strano opined that there may also be a difference in how men and women Facebook users display and interpret profile photos depicting relationships. Privacy has also been a concern for the SnapChat app, which allows you to send messages either text or photo or video which then disappear. One study has shown that security is not a major concern for the majority of users and that most do not use Snapchat to send sensitive content (although up to 25% may do so experimentally). As part of their research almost no statistically significant gender differences were found. === Cyberbullying === Past research carried out to investigate if there are any gender differences in cyber-bullying has found that boys commit more cyber verbal bullying, cyber forgery and more violence based on hidden identity or presenting themselves as other person. === Mansplaining === A 2021 article found that mansplaining could be seen more prominent online rather than offl

  Read more →
• 

  Abiquo Enterprise Edition

  Abiquo Hybrid Cloud Management Platform is a web-based cloud computing software platform developed by Abiquo. Written entirely in Java, it is used to build, integrate and manage public and private clouds in homogeneous environments. Users can deploy and manage servers, storage system and network and virtual devices. It also supports LDAP integration. == Hypervisors == Abiquo supports five hypervisor systems. VMware ESXi Microsoft Hyper-V Citrix XenServer Oracle VM Server for x86 KVM From version 3.1, it also supports multiple public cloud providers: Amazon AWS Rackspace Google Compute Engine HP Cloud ElasticHosts DigitalOcean Abiquo version 3.2 added: Microsoft Azure Abiquo version 3.4 added: Support for Docker hosts, adding multi-tenant networking, storage management and private registry management for Docker SoftLayer CloudSigma Later versions continued to add features including autoscaling on any cloud, integration to VMware NSX and OpenStack Neutron for software defined networking, guest config with cloud-init and integrated monitoring driving guest automation. == Storage services == Abiquo supports any vendor for hypervisor storage, and also supports tiered storage pools, enabling storage-as-a-service from specific vendors and technologies including: NFS Generic iSCSI NetApp Nexenta == SAAS version == In April 2014 Abiquo launched Abiquo anyCloud, a SAAS version of the Abiquo Hybrid Cloud Platform software. This version lets users manage public cloud resources from: Amazon AWS Microsoft Azure IBM SoftLayer DigitalOcean Rackspace Open Cloud (an OpenStack cloud) HP Public Cloud (an OpenStack cloud) Google Compute Engine ElasticHosts Additional security and process features include workflow, to have an enterprise administrator electronically sign off on changes, an audit trail of activity and the ability to share cloud accounts among and enterprise team in a secure way. == Reviews and awards == Finalist for the 2015 Cloud Awards Finalist for the 2015 UK Cloud Awards in the category Cloud Management Product of the Year EMA Radar for Private Cloud platforms 2013 Global Telecoms Business Innovation Summit and Awards 2013 (with Interoute) EuroCloud UK Awards

  Read more →
• 

  Backdoor (computing)

  A backdoor is a typically covert method of bypassing normal authentication or encryption in a computer, product, embedded device (e.g. a home router), or its embodiment (e.g. part of a cryptosystem, algorithm, chipset, or even a "homunculus computer"—a tiny computer-within-a-computer such as that found in Intel's AMT technology). Backdoors are most often used for securing remote access to a computer, or obtaining access to plaintext in cryptosystems. From there it may be used to gain access to privileged information like passwords, corrupt or delete data on hard drives, or transfer information within compromised networks. In the United States, the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act forces internet providers to provide backdoors for government authorities. In 2024, the U.S. government realized that China had been tapping communications in the U.S. using that infrastructure for months, or perhaps longer; China recorded presidential candidate campaign office phone calls—including employees of the then-vice president of the nation, and of the candidates themselves. A backdoor may take the form of a hidden part of a program, a separate program (e.g. Back Orifice may subvert the system through a rootkit), code in the firmware of the hardware, or parts of an operating system such as Windows, for example, device drivers. Trojan horses can be used to create vulnerabilities in a device. A Trojan horse may appear to be an entirely legitimate program, but when executed, it triggers an activity that may install a backdoor. Although some are secretly installed, other backdoors are deliberate and widely known. These kinds of backdoors have "legitimate" uses such as providing the manufacturer with a way to restore user passwords. Many systems that store information within the cloud fail to create accurate security measures. If many systems are connected within the cloud, hackers can gain access to all other platforms through the most vulnerable system. Default passwords (or other default credentials) can function as backdoors if they are not changed by the user. Some debugging features can also act as backdoors if they are not removed in the release version. In 1993, the United States government attempted to deploy an encryption system, the Clipper chip, with an explicit backdoor for law enforcement and national security access. The chip was unsuccessful. Recent proposals to counter backdoors include creating a database of backdoors' triggers and then using neural networks to detect them. == Overview == The threat of backdoors surfaced when multiuser and networked operating systems became widely adopted. Petersen and Turn discussed computer subversion in a paper published in the proceedings of the 1967 AFIPS Conference. They noted a class of active infiltration attacks that use "trapdoor" entry points into the system to bypass security facilities and permit direct access to data. The use of the word trapdoor here clearly coincides with more recent definitions of a backdoor. However, since the advent of public key cryptography the term trapdoor has acquired a different meaning (see: Trapdoor function), and thus the term "backdoor" is now preferred, only after the term trapdoor went out of use. More generally, such security breaches were discussed at length in a RAND Corporation task force report published under DARPA sponsorship by J.P. Anderson and D.J. Edwards in 1970. While initially targeting the computer vision domain, backdoor attacks have expanded to encompass various other domains, including text, audio, ML-based computer-aided design, and ML-based wireless signal classification. Additionally, vulnerabilities in backdoors have been demonstrated in deep generative models, reinforcement learning (e.g., AI GO), and deep graph models. These broad-ranging potential risks have prompted concerns from national security agencies regarding their potentially disastrous consequences. A backdoor in a login system might take the form of a hard coded user and password combination which gives access to the system. An example of this sort of backdoor was used as a plot device in the 1983 film WarGames, in which the architect of the "WOPR" computer system had inserted a hardcoded password-less account which gave the user access to the system, and to undocumented parts of the system (in particular, a video game-like simulation mode and direct interaction with the artificial intelligence). Although the number of backdoors in systems using proprietary software (software whose source code is not publicly available) is not widely credited, they are nevertheless frequently exposed. Programmers have even succeeded in secretly installing large amounts of benign code as Easter eggs in programs, although such cases may involve official forbearance, if not actual permission. == Examples == === Worms === Many computer worms, such as Sobig and Mydoom, install a backdoor on the affected computer (generally a PC on broadband running Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Outlook). Such backdoors appear to be installed so that spammers can send junk e-mail from the infected machines. Others, such as the Sony/BMG rootkit, placed secretly on millions of music CDs through late 2005, are intended as DRM measures—and, in that case, as data-gathering agents, since both surreptitious programs they installed routinely contacted central servers. A sophisticated attempt to plant a backdoor in the Linux kernel, exposed in November 2003, added a small and subtle code change by subverting the revision control system. In this case, a two-line change appeared to check root access permissions of a caller to the sys_wait4 function, but because it used assignment = instead of equality checking ==, it actually granted permissions to the system. This difference is easily overlooked, and could even be interpreted as an accidental typographical error, rather than an intentional attack. In January 2014, a backdoor was discovered in certain Samsung Android products, like the Galaxy devices. The Samsung proprietary Android versions are fitted with a backdoor that provides remote access to the data stored on the device. In particular, the Samsung Android software that is in charge of handling the communications with the modem, using the Samsung IPC protocol, implements a class of requests known as remote file server (RFS) commands, that allows the backdoor operator to perform via modem remote I/O operations on the device hard disk or other storage. As the modem is running Samsung proprietary Android software, it is likely that it offers over-the-air remote control that could then be used to issue the RFS commands and thus to access the file system on the device. === Object code backdoors === Harder to detect backdoors involve modifying object code, rather than source code—object code is much harder to inspect, as it is designed to be machine-readable, not human-readable. These backdoors can be inserted either directly in the on-disk object code, or inserted at some point during compilation, assembly linking, or loading—in the latter case the backdoor never appears on disk, only in memory. Object code backdoors are difficult to detect by inspection of the object code, but are easily detected by simply checking for changes (differences), notably in length or in checksum, and in some cases can be detected or analyzed by disassembling the object code. Further, object code backdoors can be removed (assuming source code is available) by simply recompiling from source on a trusted system. Thus for such backdoors to avoid detection, all extant copies of a binary must be subverted, and any validation checksums must also be compromised, and source must be unavailable, to prevent recompilation. Alternatively, these other tools (length checks, diff, checksumming, disassemblers) can themselves be compromised to conceal the backdoor, for example detecting that the subverted binary is being checksummed and returning the expected value, not the actual value. To conceal these further subversions, the tools must also conceal the changes in themselves—for example, a subverted checksummer must also detect if it is checksumming itself (or other subverted tools) and return false values. This leads to extensive changes in the system and tools being needed to conceal a single change. As object code can be regenerated by recompiling (reassembling, relinking) the original source code, making a persistent object code backdoor (without modifying source code) requires subverting the compiler itself—so that when it detects that it is compiling the program under attack it inserts the backdoor—or alternatively the assembler, linker, or loader. As this requires subverting the compiler, this in turn can be fixed by recompiling the compiler, removing the backdoor insertion code. This defense can in turn be subverted by putting a source meta-backdoor in the compiler, so that when it detects that it is compiling itself

  Read more →
• 

  Conditional disclosure of secrets

  Conditional disclosure of secrets (CDS) is a primitive, studied in information-theoretic cryptography, that allows distributed, non-communicating parties to coordinate the release of information to a third party. CDS was initially introduced for use in the context of private information retrieval, and has been related to communication complexity and non-local quantum computation. == Definition of conditional disclosure of secrets == The conditional disclosure of secrets setting involves three players; Alice, Bob and the referee. Alice receives an input x ∈ { 0 , 1 } n {\displaystyle x\in \{0,1\}^{n}} and a secret z ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle z\in \{0,1\}} , and Bob receives a string y ∈ { 0 , 1 } n {\displaystyle y\in \{0,1\}^{n}} . A choice of Boolean function f : { 0 , 1 } 2 n → { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle f:\{0,1\}^{2n}\rightarrow \{0,1\}} is fixed in advance and known to all players. Alice and Bob cannot communicate with one another, but share a string of random bits which we label r {\displaystyle r} . Alice and Bob compute messages m A = m A ( x , z , r ) {\displaystyle m_{A}=m_{A}(x,z,r)} and m B = m B ( y , r ) {\displaystyle m_{B}=m_{B}(y,r)} , which they send to the referee. The referee knows ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} . A CDS protocol consists of the encoding maps applied by Alice and Bob. A protocol is said to be ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } -correct if, for all ( x , y ) ∈ f − 1 ( 1 ) {\displaystyle (x,y)\in f^{-1}(1)} , the referee can determine z {\displaystyle z} with probability 1 − ϵ {\displaystyle 1-\epsilon } . A protocol is said to be δ {\displaystyle \delta } -secure if, for all ( x , y ) ∈ f − 1 ( 0 ) {\displaystyle (x,y)\in f^{-1}(0)} the distribution of the messages is δ {\displaystyle \delta } close to a simulator distribution (in total variation distance), where the simulator distribution is independent of z {\displaystyle z} . The communication complexity of a CDS protocol P is the total number of bits of message sent by Alice and Bob. The CDS communication cost of a function, C D S ϵ , δ ( f ) {\displaystyle CDS_{\epsilon ,\delta }(f)} is the minimal communication cost of an ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } -correct, δ {\displaystyle \delta } secure protocol that implements f {\displaystyle f} . The randomness complexity and randomness cost of implementing a function in the CDS model are defined similarly, but consider the number of bits of shared random bits held by Alice and Bob. == Basic properties of the primitive == === Amplification === Supposing we have an ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } -correct and δ {\displaystyle \delta } -secure CDS protocol, it is known that we can find a new protocol which reduces the correctness and privacy errors at the expense of an increased communication and randomness cost. More specifically, the following theorem has been proven Theorem (Amplification). A CDS protocol for f which supports a single-bit secret with privacy and correctness error of 1/3 can be transformed into a new CDS protocol with privacy and correctness error of 2 − Ω ( k ) {\displaystyle 2^{-\Omega (k)}} and communication/randomness complexity which are larger than those of the original protocol by a multiplicative factor of O(k). In fact, somewhat more than the above theorem is true in that the size of the secret can also be made to be of length k {\displaystyle k} , while simultaneously reducing the correctness and privacy errors as above. The proof involves first encoding the secret z {\displaystyle z} into a secret sharing scheme, and then running the original CDS protocol on each share of the resulting scheme. === Closure === If a CDS protocol for a function f {\displaystyle f} is known, then certain simple modifications of f {\displaystyle f} have CDS protocols with similar efficiency. The simplest case is to consider a CDS protocol for function f {\displaystyle f} and ask for a similarly efficient protocol for the negation of f {\displaystyle f} , labelled ¬ f {\displaystyle \neg f} . This is addressed by the following theorem Theorem (CDS is closed under complement). Suppose that f has a CDS protocol with randomness cost of ρ {\displaystyle \rho } bits, communication complexity of t {\displaystyle t} bits, and privacy and correctness errors δ = ϵ = 2 − k {\displaystyle \delta =\epsilon =2^{-k}} . Then ¬ f {\displaystyle \neg f} has a CDS scheme with similar privacy and correctness errors, and randomness and communication complexity of O ( k 3 ρ 2 t + k 3 ρ 3 ) {\displaystyle O(k^{3}\rho ^{2}t+k^{3}\rho ^{3})} . The cost of a CDS protocol is also closed under formula's, in the following sense. Consider two functions f 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}} and f 2 {\displaystyle f_{2}} . Then, the communication and randomness costs of f 1 ∧ f 2 {\displaystyle f_{1}\wedge f_{2}} as well as f 1 ∨ f 2 {\displaystyle f_{1}\vee f_{2}} are not much larger than the sum of the costs for f 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}} and f 2 {\displaystyle f_{2}} . See Applebaum et al. for a precise statement. == Upper and lower bounds on communication cost == Given a function f {\displaystyle f} we would like to understand the communication and randomness costs to implement f {\displaystyle f} in the CDS setting. Towards understanding this, protocols for implementing CDS have been developed (which give an upper bound on the cost) and lower bound strategies have been developed. For most functions, there is a large gap between the known upper and lower bound, so understanding the cost of CDS remains largely an open problem. This section presents some of what is known so far about the cost of CDS. === Secret sharing based upper bound === A subject with a close relationship to CDS is secret sharing. Secret sharing constructions provide an upper bound on the cost of CDS protocols. A secret sharing scheme encodes a secret, s {\displaystyle s} into a set of shares S 1 , . . . , S n {\displaystyle S_{1},...,S_{n}} . Associated to any secret sharing scheme is an access structure, which consists of a set of authorized sets A = A 1 , . . . , A k {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}={A_{1},...,A_{k}}} with A i ⊆ { S 1 , . . . , S n } {\displaystyle A_{i}\subseteq \{S_{1},...,S_{n}\}} . The authorized sets are those subsets of the A i {\displaystyle A_{i}} from which it is possible to recover the secret recorded into the scheme. A succinct way to describe an access structure is in terms of a function f A : { 0 , 1 } n → { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle f_{\mathcal {A}}:\{0,1\}^{n}\rightarrow \{0,1\}} . Each subset of the shares K [ x ] ⊂ { S 1 , . . . , S n } {\displaystyle K[x]\subset \{S_{1},...,S_{n}\}} is labelled by a string x ∈ { 0 , 1 } n {\displaystyle x\in \{0,1\}^{n}} such that x i = 1 {\displaystyle x_{i}=1} if and only if S i ∈ K {\displaystyle S_{i}\in K} . Then we define f A {\displaystyle f_{\mathcal {A}}} to be such that f A ( x ) = 1 {\displaystyle f_{\mathcal {A}}(x)=1} if and only if K [ x ] ∈ A {\displaystyle K[x]\in {\mathcal {A}}} . In words, the function f A {\displaystyle f_{\mathcal {A}}} is 1 when given an authorized subset as input, and 0 otherwise. A basic result in the theory of secret sharing is that an access structure A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} can be realized in a secret sharing scheme if and only if f A {\displaystyle f_{\mathcal {A}}} is monotone. The size of a secret sharing scheme is defined as the total number of bits in the shares S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} . For monotone functions, there is an upper bound on the communication cost in CDS for any monotone function f {\displaystyle f} in terms of the size of any secret sharing scheme with access structure given by f {\displaystyle f} , C D S ϵ = 0 , δ = 0 ( f ) ≤ S h a r i n g S i z e ( f ) {\displaystyle CDS_{\epsilon =0,\delta =0}(f)\leq SharingSize(f)} For some concrete classes of secret sharing schemes, this relationship can be extended to general (non-monotone) Boolean functions. This leads to an upper bound on CDS cost in terms of the size of any span program that computes f {\displaystyle f} , C D S ϵ = 0 , δ = 0 ( f ) ≤ S P k ( f ) {\displaystyle CDS_{\epsilon =0,\delta =0}(f)\leq SP_{k}(f)} The class of problems with efficient (polynomial size) span program is the complexity class M o d k L {\displaystyle Mod_{k}L} , so problems in this class have efficient CDS protocols. === Sub-exponential upper bounds for all functions === Using a matching vector family based construction, it has been proven that ∀ f , C D S ϵ = 0 , δ = 0 ( f ) ≤ 2 O ( n log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle \forall f,\,\,\,\,\,\,CDS_{\epsilon =0,\delta =0}(f)\leq 2^{O({\sqrt {n\log n}})}} . The technique for this proof is similar to one used to prove upper bounds on private information retrieval. This upper bound on CDS also leads to sub-exponential upper bounds on the size of a large class of secret sharing schemes. === Lower bounds from communication complexity === In a CDS protocol, the referee is given the inputs ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} . This means it is not clear if the messages sent by Alice a

  Read more →
• 

  Transparent decryption

  Transparent decryption is a method of decrypting data which unavoidably produces evidence that the decryption operation has taken place. The idea is to prevent the covert decryption of data. In particular, transparent decryption protocols allow a user Alice to share with Bob the right to access data, in such a way that Bob may decrypt at a time of his choosing, but only while simultaneously leaving evidence for Alice of the fact that decryption occurred. Transparent decryption supports privacy, because this evidence alerts data subjects to the fact that information about them has been decrypted and disincentivises data misuse. Recent work further formalizes transparent decryption and explores practical implementations based on cryptographic protocols and blockchain systems. == Applications == Transparent decryption has been proposed for several systems where there is a need to simultaneously achieve accountability and secrecy. For example: In lawful interception, law enforcement agencies can access private messages and emails. Transparent decryption can make such accesses accountable, giving citizens guarantees about how their private information is accessed. Data arising from vehicles and IoT devices may contain personal information about the vehicle or device owners and their activities. Nevertheless, the data is typically processed in order to provide user functionality and also to investigate and fight crime. Transparent decryption can be used to help users monitor when and how data about them is being accessed and used. == Implementation == In transparent decryption, the decryption key is distributed among a set of agents (called trustees); they use their key share only if the required transparency conditions have been satisfied. Typically, the transparency condition can be formulated as the presence of the decryption request in a distributed ledger. == Alternative solutions == Besides transparent decryption, some other techniques have been proposed for achieving law enforcement while preserving privacy. Solutions that allow competing parties to unify their data access policies. Attribute-based encryption with oblivious attribute translation (OTABE) is an extension of attribute-based encryption that allows translation between proprietary attributes belonging to different organisations, and it has been applied to the problem of law-enforcement access to phone call metadata. Solutions that rely on sophisticated cryptography, such as zero-knowledge proofs that the actions of law enforcement is consistent with judge rulings and the actions of companies, and multi-party computation to compute results.

  Read more →
• 

  Apache Parquet

  Apache Parquet is a free and open-source column-oriented data storage format in the Apache Hadoop ecosystem inspired by Google Dremel interactive ad-hoc query system for analysis of read-only nested data. It is similar to RCFile and ORC, the other columnar-storage file formats in Hadoop, and is compatible with most of the data processing frameworks around Hadoop. It provides data compression and encoding schemes with enhanced performance to handle complex data in bulk. == History == The open-source project to build Apache Parquet began as a joint effort between Twitter and Cloudera using the record shredding and assembly algorithm as described in Google's Dremel. Parquet was designed as an improvement on the Trevni columnar storage format created by Doug Cutting, the creator of Hadoop. The name 'parquet' (lit. 'small compartment') refers to a style of decorative flooring and was chosen to "evoke the bottom layer of a database with an interesting layout". The first version, Apache Parquet 1.0, was released in July 2013. Since April 27, 2015, Apache Parquet has been a top-level Apache Software Foundation (ASF)-sponsored project. == Features == Apache Parquet is implemented using the record-shredding and assembly algorithm, which accommodates the complex data structures that can be used to store data. The values in each column are stored in contiguous memory locations, providing the following benefits: Column-wise compression is efficient in storage space Encoding and compression techniques specific to the type of data in each column can be used Queries that fetch specific column values need not read the entire row, thus improving performance Apache Parquet is implemented using the Apache Thrift framework, which increases its flexibility; it can work with a number of programming languages like C++, Java, Python, PHP, etc. As of August 2015, Parquet supports the big-data-processing frameworks including Apache Hive, Apache Drill, Apache Impala, Apache Crunch, Apache Pig, Cascading, Presto and Apache Spark. It is one of the external data formats used by the pandas Python data manipulation and analysis library. == Compression and encoding == In Parquet, compression is performed column by column, which enables different encoding schemes to be used for text and integer data. This strategy also keeps the door open for newer and better encoding schemes to be implemented as they are invented. Parquet supports various compression formats: snappy, gzip, LZO, brotli, zstd, and LZ4. === Dictionary encoding === Parquet has an automatic dictionary encoding enabled dynamically for data with a small number of unique values (i.e. below 105) that enables significant compression and boosts processing speed. === Bit packing === Storage of integers is usually done with dedicated 32 or 64 bits per integer. For small integers, packing multiple integers into the same space makes storage more efficient. === Run-length encoding (RLE) === To optimize storage of multiple occurrences of the same value, run-length encoding is used, which is where a single value is stored once along with the number of occurrences. Parquet implements a hybrid of bit packing and RLE, in which the encoding switches based on which produces the best compression results. This strategy works well for certain types of integer data and combines well with dictionary encoding. == Cloud Storage and Data Lakes == Parquet is widely used as the underlying file format in modern cloud-based data lake architectures. Cloud storage systems such as Amazon S3, Azure Data Lake Storage, and Google Cloud Storage commonly store data in Parquet format due to its efficient columnar representation and retrieval capabilities. Data lakehouse frameworks—including Apache Iceberg, Delta Lake, and Apache Hudi —build an additional metadata layer on top of Parquet files to support features such as schema evolution, time-travel queries, and ACID-compliant transactions. In these architectures, Parquet files serve as the immutable storage layer while the table formats manage data versioning and transactional integrity. == Comparison == Apache Parquet is comparable to RCFile and Optimized Row Columnar (ORC) file formats — all three fall under the category of columnar data storage within the Hadoop ecosystem. They all have better compression and encoding with improved read performance at the cost of slower writes. In addition to these features, Apache Parquet supports limited schema evolution, i.e., the schema can be modified according to the changes in the data. It also provides the ability to add new columns and merge schemas that do not conflict. Apache Arrow is designed as an in-memory complement to on-disk columnar formats like Parquet and ORC. The Arrow and Parquet projects include libraries that allow for reading and writing between the two formats. == Implementations == Known implementations of Parquet include:

  Read more →
• 

  Codebook

  A codebook is a type of document used for gathering and storing cryptography codes. Originally, codebooks were often literally books, but today "codebook" is a byword for the complete record of a series of codes, regardless of physical format. == Cryptography == In cryptography, a codebook is a document used for implementing a code. A codebook contains a lookup table for coding and decoding; each word or phrase has one or more strings which replace it. To decipher messages written in code, corresponding copies of the codebook must be available at either end. The distribution and physical security of codebooks presents a special difficulty in the use of codes compared to the secret information used in ciphers, the key, which is typically much shorter. The United States National Security Agency documents sometimes use codebook to refer to block ciphers; compare their use of combiner-type algorithm to refer to stream ciphers. Codebooks come in two forms, one-part or two-part: In one-part codes, the plaintext words and phrases and the corresponding code words are in the same alphabetical order. They are organized similar to a standard dictionary. Such codes are half the size of two-part codes but are more vulnerable since an attacker who recovers some code word meanings can often infer the meaning of nearby code words. One-part codes may be used simply to shorten messages for transmission or have their security enhanced with superencryption methods, such as adding a secret number to numeric code words. In two-part codes, one part is for converting plaintext to ciphertext, the other for the opposite purpose. They are usually organized similarly to a language translation dictionary, with plaintext words (in the first part) and ciphertext words (in the second part) presented like dictionary headwords. The earliest known use of a codebook system was by Gabriele de Lavinde in 1379 working for the Antipope Clement VII. Two-part codebooks go back as least as far as Antoine Rossignol in the 1800s. From the 15th century until the middle of the 19th century, nomenclators (named after nomenclator) were the most used cryptographic method. Codebooks with superencryption were the most used cryptographic method of World War I. The JN-25 code used in World War II used a codebook of 30,000 code groups superencrypted with 30,000 random additives. The book used in a book cipher or the book used in a running key cipher can be any book shared by sender and receiver and is different from a cryptographic codebook. == Social sciences == In social sciences, a codebook is a document containing a list of the codes used in a set of data to refer to variables and their values, for example locations, occupations, or clinical diagnoses. == Data compression == Codebooks were also used in 19th- and 20th-century commercial codes for the non-cryptographic purpose of data compression. Codebooks are used in relation to precoding and beamforming in mobile networks such as 5G and LTE. The usage is standardized by 3GPP, for example in the document TS 38.331, NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification.

  Read more →
• 

  Change data capture

  In databases, change data capture (CDC) is a set of software design patterns used to determine and track the data that has changed (the "deltas") so that action can be taken using the changed data. The result is a delta-driven dataset. CDC is an approach to data integration that is based on the identification, capture and delivery of the changes made to enterprise data sources. For instance it can be used for incremental update of data loading. CDC occurs often in data warehouse environments since capturing and preserving the state of data across time is one of the core functions of a data warehouse, but CDC can be utilized in any database or data repository system. == Methodology == System developers can set up CDC mechanisms in a number of ways and in any one or a combination of system layers from application logic down to physical storage. In a simplified CDC context, one computer system has data believed to have changed from a previous point in time, and a second computer system needs to take action based on that changed data. The former is the source, the latter is the target. It is possible that the source and target are the same system physically, but that would not change the design pattern logically. Multiple CDC solutions can exist in a single system. === Timestamps on rows === Tables whose changes must be captured may have a column that represents the time of last change. Names such as LAST_UPDATE, LAST_MODIFIED, etc. are common. Any row in any table that has a timestamp in that column that is more recent than the last time data was captured is considered to have changed. Timestamps on rows are also frequently used for optimistic locking so this column is often available. === Version numbers on rows === Database designers give tables whose changes must be captured a column that contains a version number. Names such as VERSION_NUMBER, etc. are common. One technique is to mark each changed row with a version number. A current version is maintained for the table, or possibly a group of tables. This is stored in a supporting construct such as a reference table. When a change capture occurs, all data with the latest version number is considered to have changed. Once the change capture is complete, the reference table is updated with a new version number. (Do not confuse this technique with row-level versioning used for optimistic locking. For optimistic locking each row has an independent version number, typically a sequential counter. This allows a process to atomically update a row and increment its counter only if another process has not incremented the counter. But CDC cannot use row-level versions to find all changes unless it knows the original "starting" version of every row. This is impractical to maintain.) === Status indicators on rows === This technique can either supplement or complement timestamps and versioning. It can configure an alternative if, for example, a status column is set up on a table row indicating that the row has changed (e.g., a boolean column that, when set to true, indicates that the row has changed). Otherwise, it can act as a complement to the previous methods, indicating that a row, despite having a new version number or a later date, still shouldn't be updated on the target (for example, the data may require human validation). === Time/version/status on rows === This approach combines the three previously discussed methods. As noted, it is not uncommon to see multiple CDC solutions at work in a single system, however, the combination of time, version, and status provides a particularly powerful mechanism and programmers should utilize them as a trio where possible. The three elements are not redundant or superfluous. Using them together allows for such logic as, "Capture all data for version 2.1 that changed between 2005-06-01 00:00 and 2005-07-01 00:00 where the status code indicates it is ready for production." === Triggers on tables === May include a publish/subscribe pattern to communicate the changed data to multiple targets. In this approach, triggers log events that happen to the transactional table into another queue table that can later be "played back". For example, imagine an Accounts table, when transactions are taken against this table, triggers would fire that would then store a history of the event or even the deltas into a separate queue table. The queue table might have schema with the following fields: Id, TableName, RowId, Timestamp, Operation. The data inserted for our Account sample might be: 1, Accounts, 76, 2008-11-02 00:15, Update. More complicated designs might log the actual data that changed. This queue table could then be "played back" to replicate the data from the source system to a target. Data capture offers a challenge in that the structure, contents and use of a transaction log is specific to a database management system. Unlike data access, no standard exists for transaction logs. Most database management systems do not document the internal format of their transaction logs, although some provide programmatic interfaces to their transaction logs (for example: Oracle, DB2, SQL/MP, SQL/MX and SQL Server 2008). Other challenges in using transaction logs for change data capture include: Coordinating the reading of the transaction logs and the archiving of log files (database management software typically archives log files off-line on a regular basis). Translation between physical storage formats that are recorded in the transaction logs and the logical formats typically expected by database users (e.g., some transaction logs save only minimal buffer differences that are not directly useful for change consumers). Dealing with changes to the format of the transaction logs between versions of the database management system. Eliminating uncommitted changes that the database wrote to the transaction log and later rolled back. Dealing with changes to the metadata of tables in the database. CDC solutions based on transaction log files have distinct advantages that include: minimal impact on the database (even more so if one uses log shipping to process the logs on a dedicated host). no need for programmatic changes to the applications that use the database. low latency in acquiring changes. transactional integrity: log scanning can produce a change stream that replays the original transactions in the order they were committed. Such a change stream include changes made to all tables participating in the captured transaction. no need to change the database schema == Confounding factors == As often occurs in complex domains, the final solution to a CDC problem may have to balance many competing concerns. === Unsuitable source systems === Change data capture both increases in complexity and reduces in value if the source system saves metadata changes when the data itself is not modified. For example, some Data models track the user who last looked at but did not change the data in the same structure as the data. This results in noise in the Change Data Capture. === Tracking the capture === Actually tracking the changes depends on the data source. If the data is being persisted in a modern database then Change Data Capture is a simple matter of permissions. Two techniques are in common use: Tracking changes using database triggers Reading the transaction log as, or shortly after, it is written. If the data is not in a modern database, CDC becomes a programming challenge. === Push versus pull === Push: the source process creates a snapshot of changes within its own process and delivers rows downstream. The downstream process uses the snapshot, creates its own subset and delivers them to the next process. Pull: the target that is immediately downstream from the source, prepares a request for data from the source. The downstream target delivers the snapshot to the next target, as in the push model. === Alternatives === Sometimes the slowly changing dimension is used as an alternative method. CDC and SCD are similar in that both methods can detect changes in a data set. The most common forms of SCD are type 1 (overwrite), type 2 (maintain history) or 3 (only previous and current value). SCD 2 can be useful if history is needed in the target system. CDC overwrites in the target system (akin to SCD1), and is ideal when only the changed data needs to arrive at the target, i.e. a delta-driven dataset.

  Read more →
• 

  Electronic lab notebook

  An electronic lab notebook or electronic laboratory notebook (ELN) is a computer program designed to replace paper laboratory notebooks. Lab notebooks in general are used by scientists, engineers, and technicians to document research, experiments, and procedures performed in a laboratory. A lab notebook is often maintained to be a legal document and may be used in a court of law as evidence. Similar to an inventor's notebook, the lab notebook is also often referred to in patent prosecution and intellectual property litigation. Electronic lab notebooks offer many benefits to the user as well as organizations; they are easier to search upon, simplify data copying and backups, and support collaboration amongst many users. ELNs can have fine-grained access controls, and can be more secure than their paper counterparts. They also allow the direct incorporation of data from instruments, replacing the practice of printing out data to be stapled into a paper notebook. == Types == ELNs can be divided into two categories: "Specific ELNs" contain features designed to work with specific applications, scientific instrumentation or data types. "Cross-disciplinary ELNs" or "Generic ELNs" are designed to support access to all data and information that needs to be recorded in a lab notebook. Lab Platforms that combine an ELN, LIMS, and scientific data management together, all-in-one configurable software environment. Solutions range from specialized programs designed from the ground up for use as an ELN, to modifications or direct use of more general programs. Examples of using more general software as an ELN include using OpenWetWare, a MediaWiki install (running the same software that Wikipedia uses), WordPress, or the use of general note taking software such as OneNote as an ELN. ELN's come in many different forms. They can be standalone programs, use a client-server model, or be entirely web-based. Some use a lab-notebook approach, others resemble a blog. ELNs are embracing artificial intelligence and LLM technology to provide scientific AI chat assistants. A good many variations on the "ELN" acronym have appeared. Differences between systems with different names are often subtle, with considerable functional overlap between them. Examples include "ERN" (Electronic Research Notebook), "ERMS" (Electronic Resource (or Research or Records) Management System (or Software) and SDMS (Scientific Data (or Document) Management System (or Software). Ultimately, these types of systems all strive to do the same thing: Capture, record, centralize and protect scientific data in a way that is highly searchable, historically accurate, and legally stringent, and which also promotes secure collaboration, greater efficiency, reduced mistakes and lowered total research costs. == Objectives == A good electronic laboratory notebook should offer a secure environment to protect the integrity of both data and process, whilst also affording the flexibility to adopt new processes or changes to existing processes without recourse to further software development. The package architecture should be a modular design, so as to offer the benefit of minimizing validation costs of any subsequent changes that you may wish to make in the future as your needs change. A good electronic laboratory notebook should be an "out of the box" solution that, as standard, has fully configurable forms to comply with the requirements of regulated analytical groups through to a sophisticated ELN for inclusion of structures, spectra, chromatograms, pictures, text, etc. where a preconfigured form is less appropriate. All data within the system may be stored in a database (e.g. MySQL, MS-SQL, Oracle) and be fully searchable. The system should enable data to be collected, stored and retrieved through any combination of forms or ELN that best meets the requirements of the user. The application should enable secure forms to be generated that accept laboratory data input via PCs and/or laptops / palmtops, and should be directly linked to electronic devices such as laboratory balances, pH meters, etc. Networked or wireless communications should be accommodated for by the package which will allow data to be interrogated, tabulated, checked, approved, stored and archived to comply with the latest regulatory guidance and legislation. A system should also include a scheduling option for routine procedures such as equipment qualification and study related timelines. It should include configurable qualification requirements to automatically verify that instruments have been cleaned and calibrated within a specified time period, that reagents have been quality-checked and have not expired, and that workers are trained and authorized to use the equipment and perform the procedures. == Regulatory and legal aspects == The laboratory accreditation criteria found in the ISO 17025 standard needs to be considered for the protection and computer backup of electronic records. These criteria can be found specifically in clause 4.13.1.4 of the standard. Electronic lab notebooks used for development or research in regulated industries, such as medical devices or pharmaceuticals, are expected to comply with FDA regulations related to software validation. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure the integrity of the entries in terms of time, authorship, and content. Unlike ELNs for patent protection, FDA is not concerned with patent interference proceedings, but is concerned with avoidance of falsification. Typical provisions related to software validation are included in the medical device regulations at 21 CFR 820 (et seq.) and Title 21 CFR Part 11. Essentially, the requirements are that the software has been designed and implemented to be suitable for its intended purposes. Evidence to show that this is the case is often provided by a Software Requirements Specification (SRS) setting forth the intended uses and the needs that the ELN will meet; one or more testing protocols that, when followed, demonstrate that the ELN meets the requirements of the specification and that the requirements are satisfied under worst-case conditions. Security, audit trails, prevention of unauthorized changes without substantial collusion of otherwise independent personnel (i.e., those having no interest in the content of the ELN such as independent quality unit personnel) and similar tests are fundamental. Finally, one or more reports demonstrating the results of the testing in accordance with the predefined protocols are required prior to release of the ELN software for use. If the reports show that the software failed to satisfy any of the SRS requirements, then corrective and preventive action ("CAPA") must be undertaken and documented. Such CAPA may extend to minor software revisions, or changes in architecture or major revisions. CAPA activities need to be documented as well. Aside from the requirements to follow such steps for regulated industry, such an approach is generally a good practice in terms of development and release of any software to assure its quality and fitness for use. There are standards related to software development and testing that can be applied (see ref.).

  Read more →
• 

  Lose It!

  Lose It! is an American health and wellness mobile app developed by FitNow, Inc. The app generates calorie budgets for users by tracking weight, exercise, food and calorie intake, and personal goals, primarily to assist them in achieving weight loss. == History == Lose It! was developed in Boston and debuted in 2008. The app and its associated company were founded by J.J. Allaire, Charles Teague and Paul Dicristina. Prior to founding Lose It!, Teague and Allaire had founded the online research tool Onfolio, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2006. The Lose It! app was originally released as an iOS app before being released as a website in 2010 and an Android app in 2011. In 2015, Lose It! announced plans to release the app internationally. Lose It! was also available as an app for Apple Watch at its launch in 2015. The app’s “Snap It” feature, which allows users to approximate calorie counts by taking pictures of their daily meals and snacks, was released in beta in 2016. Snap It was named an Innovation Awards Honoree at the 2017 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. In 2020, Patrick Wetherille, one of the company’s earliest employees, was appointed chief executive officer. == App == Lose It! is weight loss app. The app allows users to set goals such as increasing strength, overall health/maintenance, and weight loss. It provides users recommended calorie budgets based on data such as their current weight and their desired weight. Lose It! also tracks data such as exercise/activity level and food consumption and allows users to track calories consumed by scanning barcodes for food products then retrieving calorie information for products. The app can also estimate the amount of calories in a food products. Lose It! has integration features connecting it to other apps such as Fitbit and Runkeeper. It also has social features such as joining groups and sharing progress with friends. The Premium version of the app allows users to track foods according to specific diets like keto, heart healthy or Mediterranean.

  Read more →
• 

  Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory

  Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory (CMTL) is an information technology (IT) computer security testing laboratory that is accredited to conduct cryptographic module evaluations for conformance to the FIPS 140-2 U.S. Government standard. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) accredits CMTLs to meet Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) standards and procedures. This has been replaced by FIPS 140-2 and the Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP). == CMTL requirements == These laboratories must meet the following requirements: NIST Handbook 150, NVLAP Procedures and General Requirements NIST Handbook 150-17 Information Technology Security Testing - Cryptographic Module Testing NVLAP Specific Operations Checklist for Cryptographic Module Testing == FIPS 140-2 in relation to the Common Criteria == A CMTL can also be a Common Criteria (CC) Testing Laboratory (CCTL). The CC and FIPS 140-2 are different in the abstractness and focus of evaluation. FIPS 140-2 testing is against a defined cryptographic module and provides a suite of conformance tests to four FIPS 140 security levels. FIPS 140-2 describes the requirements for cryptographic modules and includes such areas as physical security, key management, self tests, roles and services, etc. The standard was initially developed in 1994 - prior to the development of the CC. The CC is an evaluation against a Protection Profile (PP), or security target (ST). Typically, a PP covers a broad range of products. A CC evaluation does not supersede or replace a validation to either FIPS 140-1, FIPS140-2 or FIPS 140-3. The four security levels in FIPS 140-1 and FIPS 140-2 do not map directly to specific CC EALs or to CC functional requirements. A CC certificate cannot be a substitute for a FIPS 140-1 or FIPS 140-2 certificate. If the operational environment is a modifiable operational environment, the operating system requirements of the Common Criteria are applicable at FIPS Security Levels 2 and above. FIPS 140-1 required evaluated operating systems that referenced the Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC) classes C2, B1 and B2. However, TCSEC is no longer in use and has been replaced by the Common Criteria. Consequently, FIPS 140-2 now references the Common Criteria. FIPS 140-2 or FIPS 140-3 validation efforts can be in some parts reused in Common Criteria evaluations, specifically in areas related to entropy source and cryptographic algorithms.

  Read more →
• 

  Cloud Data Management Interface

  ISO/IEC 17826 Information technology — Cloud Data Management Interface (CDMI) Version 2.0.0 is an international standard that specifies a protocol for self-provisioning, administering and managing access to data stored in cloud storage, object storage, storage area network and network attached storage systems. The CDMI standard is developed and maintained by the Storage Networking Industry Association, who makes a publicly accessible version of the specification available. CDMI defines new resource representations to enable standardized management of any URI-accessible data, and defines RESTful HTTP operations using these representations to discover the capabilities of the storage system, discover stored data, access and update management metadata, specify data storage protocols (such as iSCSI and NFS) through which the stored data is accessed, and provide cross-system and cross-cloud import and export in order to enable data portability. Management functions enabled by CDMI include managing data ownership, identity mapping, access controls, user-specified metadata, and to declaratively specify desired data protection, data retention, constraints on geographic placement, desired quality of service, data versioning and security requirements. CDMI also defines utility services to facilitate data management, such the ability to query data matching specific criteria, and includes extensions to perform bulk updates using CDMI Jobs. == Capabilities == Compliant implementations must provide access to a set of configuration parameters known as capabilities. These are either boolean values that represent whether or not a system supports things such as queues, export via other protocols, path-based storage and so on, or numeric values expressing system limits, such as how much metadata may be placed on an object. As a minimal compliant implementation can be quite small, with few features, clients need to check the cloud storage system for a capability before attempting to use the functionality it represents. Resource allocation assignments limited to the data management interface protocols must possess access bypass capabilities which extend beyond the layered framework. This integral function is vital to the prevention of transport layer session hijacking by unauthorized entities which may circumvent standard interfacing security parameters. == Containers == A CDMI client may access objects, including containers, by either name or object id (OID), assuming the CDMI server supports both methods. When storing objects by name, it is natural to use nested named containers; the resulting structure corresponds exactly to a traditional filesystem directory structure. == Objects == Objects are similar to files in a traditional file system, but are enhanced with an increased amount and capacity for metadata. As with containers, they may be accessed by either name or OID. When accessed by name, clients use URLs that contain the full pathname of objects to create, read, update and delete them. When accessed by OID, the URL specifies an OID string in the cdmi-objectid container; this container presents a flat name space conformant with standard object storage system semantics. Subject to system limits, objects may be of any size or type and have arbitrary user-supplied metadata attached to them. Systems that support query allow arbitrary queries to be run against the metadata. == Domains, Users and Groups == CDMI supports the concept of a domain, similar in concept to a domain in the Windows Active Directory model. Users and groups created in a domain share a common administrative database and are known to each other on a "first name" basis, i.e. without reference to any other domain or system. Domains also function as containers for usage and billing summary data. == Access Control == CDMI exactly follows the ACL and ACE model used for file authorization operations by NFSv4. This makes it also compatible with Microsoft Windows systems. == Metadata == CDMI draws much of its metadata model from the XAM specification. Objects and containers have "storage system metadata", "data system metadata" and arbitrary user specified metadata, in addition to the metadata maintained by an ordinary filesystem (atime etc.). == Queries == CDMI specifies a way for systems to support arbitrary queries against CDMI containers, with a rich set of comparison operators, including support for regular expressions. == Queues == CDMI supports the concept of persistent FIFO (first-in, first-out) queues. These are useful for job scheduling, order processing and other tasks in which lists of things must be processed in order. == Compliance == Both retention intervals and retention holds are supported by CDMI. A retention interval consists of a start time and a retention period. During this time interval, objects are preserved as immutable and may not be deleted. A retention hold is usually placed on an object because of judicial action and has the same effect: objects may not be changed nor deleted until all holds placed on them are removed. == Billing == Summary information suitable for billing clients for on-demand services can be obtained by authorized users from systems that support it. == Serialization == Serialization of objects and containers allows export of all data and metadata on a system and importation of that data into another cloud system. == Foreign protocols == CDMI supports export of containers as NFS or CIFS shares. Clients that mount these shares see the container hierarchy as an ordinary filesystem directory hierarchy, and the objects in the containers as normal files. Metadata outside of ordinary filesystem metadata may or may not be exposed. Provisioning of iSCSI LUNs is also supported. == Client SDKs == CDMI Reference Implementation Droplet libcdmi-java libcdmi-python .NET SDK

  Read more →