AI Email Body Generator

AI Email Body Generator — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Spanner (database)

Spanner is a distributed SQL database management and storage service developed by Google. It provides features such as global transactions, strongly consistent reads, and automatic multi-site replication and failover. Spanner is used in Google F1, the database for its advertising business Google Ads, as well as Gmail and Google Photos. == Features == Spanner stores large amounts of mutable structured data. Spanner allows users to perform arbitrary queries using SQL with relational data while maintaining strong consistency and high availability for that data with synchronous replication. Key features of Spanner: Transactions can be applied across rows, columns, tables, and databases within a Spanner universe. Clients can control the replication and placement of data using automatic multi-site replication and failover. Replication is synchronous and strongly consistent. Reads are strongly consistent and data is versioned to allow for stale reads: clients can read previous versions of data, subject to garbage collection windows. Supports a native SQL interface for reading and writing data. Support for Graph Query Language == History == Spanner was first described in 2012 for internal Google data centers. Spanner's SQL capability was added in 2017 and documented in a SIGMOD 2017 paper. It became available as part of Google Cloud Platform in 2017, under the name "Cloud Spanner". == Architecture == Spanner uses the Paxos algorithm as part of its operation to shard (partition) data across up to hundreds of servers. It makes heavy use of hardware-assisted clock synchronization using GPS clocks and atomic clocks to ensure global consistency. TrueTime is the brand name for Google's distributed cloud infrastructure, which provides Spanner with the ability to generate monotonically increasing timestamps in data centers around the world. Google's F1 SQL database management system (DBMS) is built on top of Spanner, replacing Google's custom MySQL variant.
Read more →
Strong cryptography

Strong cryptography or cryptographically strong are general terms used to designate the cryptographic algorithms that, when used correctly, provide a very high (usually insurmountable) level of protection against any eavesdropper, including the government agencies. There is no precise definition of the boundary line between the strong cryptography and (breakable) weak cryptography, as this border constantly shifts due to improvements in hardware and cryptanalysis techniques. These improvements eventually place the capabilities once available only to the NSA within the reach of a skilled individual, so in practice there are only two levels of cryptographic security, "cryptography that will stop your kid sister from reading your files, and cryptography that will stop major governments from reading your files" (Bruce Schneier). The strong cryptography algorithms have high security strength, for practical purposes usually defined as a number of bits in the key. For example, the United States government, when dealing with export control of encryption, considered as of 1999 any implementation of the symmetric encryption algorithm with the key length above 56 bits or its public key equivalent to be strong and thus potentially a subject to the export licensing. To be strong, an algorithm needs to have a sufficiently long key and be free of known mathematical weaknesses, as exploitation of these effectively reduces the key size. At the beginning of the 21st century, the typical security strength of the strong symmetrical encryption algorithms is 128 bits (slightly lower values still can be strong, but usually there is little technical gain in using smaller key sizes). Demonstrating the resistance of any cryptographic scheme to attack is a complex matter, requiring extensive testing and reviews, preferably in a public forum. Good algorithms and protocols are required (similarly, good materials are required to construct a strong building), but good system design and implementation is needed as well: "it is possible to build a cryptographically weak system using strong algorithms and protocols" (just like the use of good materials in construction does not guarantee a solid structure). Many real-life systems turn out to be weak when the strong cryptography is not used properly, for example, random nonces are reused A successful attack might not even involve algorithm at all, for example, if the key is generated from a password, guessing a weak password is easy and does not depend on the strength of the cryptographic primitives. A user can become the weakest link in the overall picture, for example, by sharing passwords and hardware tokens with the colleagues. == Background == The level of expense required for strong cryptography originally restricted its use to the government and military agencies, until the middle of the 20th century the process of encryption required a lot of human labor and errors (preventing the decryption) were very common, so only a small share of written information could have been encrypted. US government, in particular, was able to keep a monopoly on the development and use of cryptography in the US into the 1960s. In the 1970, the increased availability of powerful computers and unclassified research breakthroughs (Data Encryption Standard, the Diffie-Hellman and RSA algorithms) made strong cryptography available for civilian use. Mid-1990s saw the worldwide proliferation of knowledge and tools for strong cryptography. By the 21st century the technical limitations were gone, although the majority of the communication were still unencrypted. At the same the cost of building and running systems with strong cryptography became roughly the same as the one for the weak cryptography. The use of computers changed the process of cryptanalysis, famously with Bletchley Park's Colossus. But just as the development of digital computers and electronics helped in cryptanalysis, it also made possible much more complex ciphers. It is typically the case that use of a quality cipher is very efficient, while breaking it requires an effort many orders of magnitude larger - making cryptanalysis so inefficient and impractical as to be effectively impossible. == Cryptographically strong algorithms == This term "cryptographically strong" is often used to describe an encryption algorithm, and implies, in comparison to some other algorithm (which is thus cryptographically weak), greater resistance to attack. But it can also be used to describe hashing and unique identifier and filename creation algorithms. See for example the description of the Microsoft .NET runtime library function Path.GetRandomFileName. In this usage, the term means "difficult to guess". An encryption algorithm is intended to be unbreakable (in which case it is as strong as it can ever be), but might be breakable (in which case it is as weak as it can ever be) so there is not, in principle, a continuum of strength as the idiom would seem to imply: Algorithm A is stronger than Algorithm B which is stronger than Algorithm C, and so on. The situation is made more complex, and less subsumable into a single strength metric, by the fact that there are many types of cryptanalytic attack and that any given algorithm is likely to force the attacker to do more work to break it when using one attack than another. There is only one known unbreakable cryptographic system, the one-time pad, which is not generally possible to use because of the difficulties involved in exchanging one-time pads without them being compromised. So any encryption algorithm can be compared to the perfect algorithm, the one-time pad. The usual sense in which this term is (loosely) used, is in reference to a particular attack, brute force key search — especially in explanations for newcomers to the field. Indeed, with this attack (always assuming keys to have been randomly chosen), there is a continuum of resistance depending on the length of the key used. But even so there are two major problems: many algorithms allow use of different length keys at different times, and any algorithm can forgo use of the full key length possible. Thus, Blowfish and RC5 are block cipher algorithms whose design specifically allowed for several key lengths, and who cannot therefore be said to have any particular strength with respect to brute force key search. Furthermore, US export regulations restrict key length for exportable cryptographic products and in several cases in the 1980s and 1990s (e.g., famously in the case of Lotus Notes' export approval) only partial keys were used, decreasing 'strength' against brute force attack for those (export) versions. More or less the same thing happened outside the US as well, as for example in the case of more than one of the cryptographic algorithms in the GSM cellular telephone standard. The term is commonly used to convey that some algorithm is suitable for some task in cryptography or information security, but also resists cryptanalysis and has no, or fewer, security weaknesses. Tasks are varied, and might include: generating randomness encrypting data providing a method to ensure data integrity Cryptographically strong would seem to mean that the described method has some kind of maturity, perhaps even approved for use against different kinds of systematic attacks in theory and/or practice. Indeed, that the method may resist those attacks long enough to protect the information carried (and what stands behind the information) for a useful length of time. But due to the complexity and subtlety of the field, neither is almost ever the case. Since such assurances are not actually available in real practice, sleight of hand in language which implies that they are will generally be misleading. There will always be uncertainty as advances (e.g., in cryptanalytic theory or merely affordable computer capacity) may reduce the effort needed to successfully use some attack method against an algorithm. In addition, actual use of cryptographic algorithms requires their encapsulation in a cryptosystem, and doing so often introduces vulnerabilities which are not due to faults in an algorithm. For example, essentially all algorithms require random choice of keys, and any cryptosystem which does not provide such keys will be subject to attack regardless of any attack resistant qualities of the encryption algorithm(s) used. == Legal issues == Widespread use of encryption increases the costs of surveillance, so the government policies aim to regulate the use of the strong cryptography. In the 2000s, the effect of encryption on the surveillance capabilities was limited by the ever-increasing share of communications going through the global social media platforms, that did not use the strong encryption and provided governments with the requested data. Murphy talks about a legislative balance that needs to be struck between the power of the government that are broad enough to be able to follow the qui
Read more →
Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle

The Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) is the approach Microsoft uses to integrate security into DevOps processes (sometimes called a DevSecOps approach). You can use this SDL guidance and documentation to adapt this approach and practices to your organization. == Overview == The practices outlined in the SDL approach are applicable to all types of software development and across all platforms, ranging from traditional waterfall methodologies to modern DevOps approaches. They can generally be applied to the following: Software – whether you are developing software code for firmware, AI applications, operating systems, drivers, IoT Devices, mobile device apps, web services, plug-ins or applets, hardware microcode, low-code/no-code apps, or other software formats. Note that most practices in the SDL are applicable to secure computer hardware development as well. Platforms – whether the software is running on a ‘serverless’ platform approach, on an on-premises server, a mobile device, a cloud hosted VM, a user endpoint, as part of a Software as a Service (SaaS) application, a cloud edge device, an IoT device, or anywhere else. == Practices == The SDL recommends 10 security practices to incorporate into your development workflows. Applying the 10 security practices of SDL is an ongoing process of improvement so a key recommendation is to begin from some point and keep enhancing as you proceed. This continuous process involves changes to culture, strategy, processes, and technical controls as you embed security skills and practices into DevOps workflows. The 10 SDL practices are: Establish security standards, metrics, and governance Require use of proven security features, languages, and frameworks Perform security design review and threat modeling Define and use cryptography standards Secure the software supply chain Secure the engineering environment Perform security testing Ensure operational platform security Implement security monitoring and response Provide security training == Versions ==
Read more →
CANaerospace

CANaerospace is a higher layer protocol based on Controller Area Network (CAN) which has been developed by Stock Flight Systems in 1998 for aeronautical applications. == Background == CANaerospace supports airborne systems employing the Line-replaceable unit (LRU) concept to share data across CAN and ensures interoperability between CAN LRUs by defining CAN physical layer characteristics, network layers, communication mechanisms, data types and aeronautical axis systems. CANaerospace is an open source project, was initiated to standardize the interface between CAN LRUs on the system level. CANaerospace is continuously being developed further and has also been published by NASA as the Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments Databus Standard in 2001. It found widespread use in aeronautical research worldwide. A major research aircraft that employs several CANaerospace networks for real-time computer interconnection is the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA), a Boeing 747SP with a 2.5m astronomic telescope. CANaerospace is also frequently used in flight simulation and connects entire aircraft cockpits (i.e. in Eurofighter Typhoon simulators) to the simulation host computers. In Italy CANaerospace is used as UAV data bus technology. Furthermore, CANaerospace serves as communication network in several general aviation avionics systems. The CANaerospace interface definition closes the gap between the ISO/OSI layer 1 and 2 CAN protocol (which is implemented in the CAN controller itself) and the specific requirements of distributed systems in aircraft. It may be used as a primary or ancillary avionics network and was designed to meet the following requirements: Democratic network: CANaerospace does not require any master/slave relationships between LRUs or a "bus controller", thereby avoiding a potential single source of failure. Every node in the network has the same rights for participation in the bus traffic. Self-identifying message format: Each CANaerospace message contains information about the type of the data and the transmitting node. This allows the data to be unambiguously recognized at each receiving node. Continuous Message Numbering: Each CANaerospace message contains a continuously incremented number which allows coherent processing of messages in the receiving stations. Message Status Code: Each CANaerospace message contains information about the integrity of the data is conveying. This allows receiving stations to evaluate the quality of the received data and to react accordingly. Emergency Event Signaling: CANaerospace defines a mechanism that allows each node to transmit information about exception or error situations. This information can be used by other stations to determine the network health. Node Service Interface: As an enhancement to CAN, CANaerospace provides a means for individual stations on the network to communicate with each other using connection-oriented and connectionless services. Predefined CAN Identifier Assignment: CANaerospace offers a predefined identifier assignment list for normal operation data. In addition to the predefined list, user-defined identifier assignment lists may be used. Ease of Implementation: The amount of code to implement CANaerospace is very little by design in order to minimize the effort for testing and certification of flight safety critical systems. Openness to Extensions: All CANaerospace definitions are extendable to provide flexibility for future enhancements and to allow adaptions to the requirements of specific applications. Free Availability: No cost whatsoever apply for the use of CANaerospace. The specification can be downloaded from the Internet == Physical interface == To ensure interoperability and reliable communication, CANaerospace specifies the electrical characteristics, bus transceiver requirements and data rates with the corresponding tolerances based on ISO 11898. The bit timing calculation (baud rate accuracy, sample point definition) and robustness to electromagnetic interference are given special emphasis. Also addressed are CAN connector, wiring considerations and design guidelines to maximize electromagnetic compatibility. == Communication layers == The Bosch CAN specification itself allows messages being transmitted both periodically and aperiodically but does not cover issues like data representation, node addressing or connection-oriented protocols. CAN is entirely based on Anyone-to-Many (ATM) communication which means that CAN messages are always received by all stations in the network. The advantage of the CAN concept is inherent data consistency between all stations, the drawback is that it does not allow node addressing which is the basis for Peer-to-Peer (PTP) communication. Using CAN networks in aeronautical applications, however, demands a standard targeted to the specific requirements of airborne systems which implies that communication between individual stations in the network must be possible to enable the required degree of system monitoring. Consequently, CANaerospace defines additional ISO/OSI layer 3, 4 and 6 functions to support node addressing and unified ATM/PTP communication mechanisms. PTP communication allows to set up client/server interactions between individual stations in the network either temporarily or permanently. More than one of these interactions may be in effect at any given time and each node may be client for one operation and server for another at the same time. This CANaerospace mechanism is called "Node Service Concept" and allows i.e. to distribute system functions over several stations in the network or to control dynamic system reconfiguration in case of failure. The Node Service concept supports both connection-oriented and connectionless interactions like with TCP/IP and UDP/IP for Ethernet. Enabling both ATM and PTP communication for CAN requires the introduction of independent network layers to isolate the different types of communication. This is realized for CANaerospace by forming CAN identifier groups as shown in Figure 1. The resulting structure creates Logical Communication Channels (LCCs) and assigns a specific communication type (ATM, PTP) to each of the LCCs. User-defined LCCs provide the necessary freedom for designers and allow the implementation of CANaerospace according to the needs of specific applications. Figure 1: Logical Communication Channels for CANaerospace As a side effect, the CAN identifier groups in Figure 1 affect the priority of the message transmission in case of bus arbitration. The communication channels are therefore arranged according to their relative importance: Emergency Event Data Channel (EED): This communication channel is used for messages which require immediate action (i.e. system degradation or reconfiguration) and have to be transmitted with very high priority. Emergency Event Data uses ATM communication exclusively. High/Low Priority Node Service Data Channel (NSH/NSL): These communication channels are used for client/server interactions using PTP communication. The corresponding services may be of the connection-oriented as well as the connectionless type. NSH/NSL may also be used to support test and maintenance functions. Normal Operation Data Channel (NOD): This communication channel is used for the transmission of the data which is generated during normal system operation and described in the CANaerospace identifier assignment list. These messages may be transmitted periodically or aperiodically as well as synchronously or asynchronously. All messages which cannot be assigned to other communication channels shall use this channel. High/Low Priority User-Defined Data Channel (UDH/UDL): This channel is dedicated to communication which cannot, due to their specific characteristics, be assigned other channels without violating the CANaerospace specification. As long as the defined identifier range is used, the message content and the communication type (ATM, PTP) for these channels may be specified by the system designer. To ensure interoperability it is highly recommended that the use of these channels is minimized. Debug Service Data Channel (DSD): This channel is dedicated to messages which are used temporarily for development and test purposes only and are not transmitted during normal operation. As long as the defined identifier range is used, the message content and the communication type (ATM, PTP) for these channels may be specified by the system designer. == Data representation == The majority of the real-time control systems used in aeronautics employ "big endian" processor architectures. This data representation was therefore specified for CANaerospace as well. With big endian data representation, the most significant bit of any datum is arranged leftmost and transmitted first on CANaerospace as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: "Big Endian" Data Representation for CANaerospace CANaerospace uses a self-identifying message
Read more →
Human image synthesis

Human image synthesis is technology that can be applied to make believable and even photorealistic renditions of human-likenesses, moving or still. It has effectively existed since the early 2000s. Many films using computer generated imagery have featured synthetic images of human-like characters digitally composited onto the real or other simulated film material. Towards the end of the 2010s deep learning artificial intelligence has been applied to synthesize images and video that look like humans, without need for human assistance, once the training phase has been completed, whereas the old school 7D-route required massive amounts of human work. == Timeline of human image synthesis == In 1971 Henri Gouraud made the first CG geometry capture and representation of a human face. Modeling was his wife Sylvie Gouraud. The 3D model was a simple wire-frame model and he applied the Gouraud shader he is most known for to produce the first known representation of human-likeness on computer. The 1972 short film A Computer Animated Hand by Edwin Catmull and Fred Parke was the first time that computer-generated imagery was used in film to simulate moving human appearance. The film featured a computer simulated hand and face (watch film here). The 1976 film Futureworld reused parts of A Computer Animated Hand on the big screen. The 1983 music video for song Musique Non-Stop by German band Kraftwerk aired in 1986. Created by the artist Rebecca Allen, it features non-realistic looking, but clearly recognizable computer simulations of the band members. The 1994 film The Crow was the first film production to make use of digital compositing of a computer simulated representation of a face onto scenes filmed using a body double. Necessity was the muse as the actor Brandon Lee portraying the protagonist was tragically killed accidentally on-stage. In 1999 Paul Debevec et al. of USC captured the reflectance field of a human face with their first version of a light stage. They presented their method at the SIGGRAPH 2000 In 2003 audience debut of photo realistic human-likenesses in the 2003 films The Matrix Reloaded in the burly brawl sequence where up-to-100 Agent Smiths fight Neo and in The Matrix Revolutions where at the start of the end showdown Agent Smith's cheekbone gets punched in by Neo leaving the digital look-alike unnaturally unhurt. The Matrix Revolutions bonus DVD documents and depicts the process in some detail and the techniques used, including facial motion capture and limbal motion capture, and projection onto models. In 2003 The Animatrix: Final Flight of the Osiris a state-of-the-art want-to-be human likenesses not quite fooling the watcher made by Square Pictures. In 2003 digital likeness of Tobey Maguire was made for movies Spider-man 2 and Spider-man 3 by Sony Pictures Imageworks. In 2005 the Face of the Future project was an established. by the University of St Andrews and Perception Lab, funded by the EPSRC. The website contains a "Face Transformer", which enables users to transform their face into any ethnicity and age as well as the ability to transform their face into a painting (in the style of either Sandro Botticelli or Amedeo Modigliani). This process is achieved by combining the user's photograph with an average face. In 2009 Debevec et al. presented new digital likenesses, made by Image Metrics, this time of actress Emily O'Brien whose reflectance was captured with the USC light stage 5 Motion looks fairly convincing contrasted to the clunky run in the Animatrix: Final Flight of the Osiris which was state-of-the-art in 2003 if photorealism was the intention of the animators. In 2009 a digital look-alike of a younger Arnold Schwarzenegger was made for the movie Terminator Salvation though the end result was critiqued as unconvincing. Facial geometry was acquired from a 1984 mold of Schwarzenegger. In 2010 Walt Disney Pictures released a sci-fi sequel entitled Tron: Legacy with a digitally rejuvenated digital look-alike of actor Jeff Bridges playing the antagonist CLU. In SIGGGRAPH 2013 Activision and USC presented a real-time "Digital Ira" a digital face look-alike of Ari Shapiro, an ICT USC research scientist, utilizing the USC light stage X by Ghosh et al. for both reflectance field and motion capture. The end result both precomputed and real-time rendering with the modernest game GPU shown here and looks fairly realistic. In 2014 The Presidential Portrait by USC Institute for Creative Technologies in conjunction with the Smithsonian Institution was made using the latest USC mobile light stage wherein President Barack Obama had his geometry, textures and reflectance captured. In 2014 Ian Goodfellow et al. presented the principles of a generative adversarial network. GANs made the headlines in early 2018 with the deepfakes controversies. For the 2015 film Furious 7 a digital look-alike of actor Paul Walker who died in an accident during the filming was done by Weta Digital to enable the completion of the film. In 2016 techniques which allow near real-time counterfeiting of facial expressions in existing 2D video have been believably demonstrated. In 2016 a digital look-alike of Peter Cushing was made for the Rogue One film where its appearance would appear to be of same age as the actor was during the filming of the original 1977 Star Wars film. In SIGGRAPH 2017 an audio driven digital look-alike of upper torso of Barack Obama was presented by researchers from University of Washington. It was driven only by a voice track as source data for the animation after the training phase to acquire lip sync and wider facial information from training material consisting 2D videos with audio had been completed. Late 2017 and early 2018 saw the surfacing of the deepfakes controversy where porn videos were doctored using deep machine learning so that the face of the actress was replaced by the software's opinion of what another persons face would look like in the same pose and lighting. In 2018 Game Developers Conference Epic Games and Tencent Games demonstrated "Siren", a digital look-alike of the actress Bingjie Jiang. It was made possible with the following technologies: CubicMotion's computer vision system, 3Lateral's facial rigging system and Vicon's motion capture system. The demonstration ran in near real time at 60 frames per second in the Unreal Engine 4. In 2018 at the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen the Xinhua News Agency presented two digital look-alikes made to the resemblance of its real news anchors Qiu Hao (Chinese language) and Zhang Zhao (English language). The digital look-alikes were made in conjunction with Sogou. Neither the speech synthesis used nor the gesturing of the digital look-alike anchors were good enough to deceive the watcher to mistake them for real humans imaged with a TV camera. In September 2018 Google added "involuntary synthetic pornographic imagery" to its ban list, allowing anyone to request the search engine block results that falsely depict them as "nude or in a sexually explicit situation." In February 2019 Nvidia open sources StyleGAN, a novel generative adversarial network. Right after this Phillip Wang made the website ThisPersonDoesNotExist.com with StyleGAN to demonstrate that unlimited amounts of often photo-realistic looking facial portraits of no-one can be made automatically using a GAN. Nvidia's StyleGAN was presented in a not yet peer reviewed paper in late 2018. At the June 2019 CVPR the MIT CSAIL presented a system titled "Speech2Face: Learning the Face Behind a Voice" that synthesizes likely faces based on just a recording of a voice. It was trained with massive amounts of video of people speaking. Since 1 July 2019 Virginia has criminalized the sale and dissemination of unauthorized synthetic pornography, but not the manufacture., as § 18.2–386.2 titled 'Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another; penalty.' became part of the Code of Virginia. The law text states: "Any person who, with the intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate, maliciously disseminates or sells any videographic or still image created by any means whatsoever that depicts another person who is totally nude, or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast, where such person knows or has reason to know that he is not licensed or authorized to disseminate or sell such videographic or still image is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.". The identical bills were House Bill 2678 presented by Delegate Marcus Simon to the Virginia House of Delegates on 14 January 2019 and three-day later an identical Senate bill 1736 was introduced to the Senate of Virginia by Senator Adam Ebbin. Since 1 September 2019 Texas senate bill SB 751 amendments to the election code came into effect, giving candidates in elections a 30-day protection period to the elections during which making and distributing digital look-alikes or synthetic fakes of the candidates is an offense. Th
Read more →
Merit Network

Merit Network, Inc., is a nonprofit member-governed organization providing high-performance computer networking and related services to educational, government, health care, and nonprofit organizations, primarily in Michigan. Created in 1966, Merit operates the longest running regional computer network in the United States. == Organization == Created in 1966 as the Michigan Educational Research Information Triad by Michigan State University (MSU), the University of Michigan (U-M), and Wayne State University (WSU), Merit was created to investigate resource sharing by connecting the mainframe computers at these three Michigan public research universities. Merit's initial three node packet-switched computer network was operational in October 1972 using custom hardware based on DEC PDP-11 minicomputers and software developed by the Merit staff and the staffs at the three universities. Over the next dozen years the initial network grew as new services such as dial-in terminal support, remote job submission, remote printing, and file transfer were added; as gateways to the national and international Tymnet, Telenet, and Datapac networks were established, as support for the X.25 and TCP/IP protocols was added; as additional computers such as WSU's MVS system and the UM's electrical engineering's VAX running UNIX were attached; and as new universities became Merit members. Merit's involvement in national networking activities started in the mid-1980s with connections to the national supercomputing centers and work on the 56 kbit/s National Science Foundation Network (NSFNET), the forerunner of today's Internet. From 1987 until April 1995, Merit re-engineered and managed the NSFNET backbone service. MichNet, Merit's regional network in Michigan was attached to NSFNET and in the early 1990s Merit began extending "the Internet" throughout Michigan, offering both direct connect and dial-in services, and upgrading the statewide network from 56 kbit/s to 1.5 Mbit/s, and on to 45, 155, 622 Mbit/s, and eventually 1 and 10 Gbit/s. In 2003 Merit began its transition to a facilities based network, using fiber optic facilities that it shares with its members, that it purchases or leases under long-term agreements, or that it builds. In addition to network connectivity services, Merit offers a number of related services within Michigan and beyond, including: Internet2 connectivity, VPN, Network monitoring, Voice over IP (VOIP), Cloud storage, E-mail, Domain Name, Network Time, VMware and Zimbra software licensing, Colocation, and professional development seminars, workshops, classes, conferences, and meetings. == History == === Creating the network: 1966 to 1973 === The Michigan Educational Research Information Triad (MERIT) was formed in the fall of 1966 by Michigan State University (MSU), University of Michigan (U-M), and Wayne State University (WSU). More often known as the Merit Computer Network or simply Merit, it was created to design and implement a computer network connecting the mainframe computers at the universities. In the fall of 1969, after funding for the initial development of the network had been secured, Bertram Herzog was named director for MERIT. Eric Aupperle was hired as senior engineer, and was charged with finding hardware to make the network operational. The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the State of Michigan provided the initial funding for the network. In June 1970, the Applied Dynamics Division of Reliance Electric in Saline, Michigan was contracted to build three Communication Computers or CCs. Each would consist of a Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) PDP-11 computer, dataphone interfaces, and interfaces that would attach them directly to the mainframe computers. The cost was to be slightly less than the $300,000 ($2,487,100, adjusted for inflation) originally budgeted. Merit staff wrote the software that ran on the CCs, while staff at each of the universities wrote the mainframe software to interface to the CCs. The first completed connection linked the IBM S/360-67 mainframe computers running the Michigan Terminal System at WSU and U-M, and was publicly demonstrated on December 14, 1971. The MSU node was completed in October 1972, adding a CDC 6500 mainframe running Scope/Hustler. The network was officially dedicated on May 15, 1973. === Expanding the network: 1974 to 1985 === In 1974, Herzog returned to teaching in the University of Michigan's Industrial Engineering Department, and Aupperle was appointed as director. Use of the all uppercase name "MERIT" was abandoned in favor of the mixed case "Merit". The first network connections were host to host interactive connections which allowed person to remote computer or local computer to remote computer interactions. To this, terminal to host connections, batch connections (remote job submission, remote printing, batch file transfer), and interactive file copy were added. And, in addition to connecting to host computers over custom hardware interfaces, the ability to connect to hosts or other networks over groups of asynchronous ports and via X.25 were added. Merit interconnected with Telenet (later SprintNet) in 1976 to give Merit users dial-in access from locations around the United States. Dial-in access within the U.S. and internationally was further expanded via Merit's interconnections to Tymnet, ADP's Autonet, and later still the IBM Global Network as well as Merit's own expanding network of dial-in sites in Michigan, New York City, and Washington, D.C. In 1978, Western Michigan University (WMU) became the fourth member of Merit (prompting a name change, as the acronym Merit no longer made sense as the group was no longer a triad). To expand the network, the Merit staff developed new hardware interfaces for the Digital PDP-11 based on printed circuit technology. The new system became known as the Primary Communications Processor (PCP), with the earliest PCPs connecting a PDP-10 located at WMU and a DEC VAX running UNIX at U-M's Electrical Engineering department. A second hardware technology initiative in 1983 produced the smaller Secondary Communication Processors (SCP) based on DEC LSI-11 processors. The first SCP was installed at the Michigan Union in Ann Arbor, creating UMnet, which extended Merit's network connectivity deeply into the U-M campus. In 1983 Merit's PCP and SCP software was enhanced to support TCP/IP and Merit interconnected with the ARPANET. === National networking, NSFNET, and the Internet: 1986 to 1995 === In 1986 Merit engineered and operated leased lines and satellite links that allowed the University of Michigan to access the supercomputing facilities at Pittsburgh, San Diego, and NCAR. In 1987, Merit, IBM and MCI submitted a winning proposal to NSF to implement a new NSFNET backbone network. The new NSFNET backbone network service began July 1, 1988. It interconnected supercomputing centers around the country at 1.5 megabits per second (T1), 24 times faster than the 56 kilobits-per-second speed of the previous network. The NSFNET backbone grew to link scientists and educators on university campuses nationwide and connect them to their counterparts around the world. The NSFNET project caused substantial growth at Merit, nearly tripling the staff and leading to the establishment of a new 24-hour Network Operations Center at the U-M Computer Center. In September 1990 in anticipation of the NSFNET T3 upgrade and the approaching end of the 5-year NSFNET cooperative agreement, Merit, IBM, and MCI formed Advanced Network and Services (ANS), a new non-profit corporation with a more broadly based Board of Directors than the Michigan-based Merit Network. Under its cooperative agreement with NSF, Merit remained ultimately responsible for the operation of NSFNET, but subcontracted much of the engineering and operations work to ANS. In 1991 the NSFNET backbone service was expanded to additional sites and upgraded to a more robust 45 Mbit/s (T3) based network. The new T3 backbone was named ANSNet and provided the physical infrastructure used by Merit to deliver the NSFNET Backbone Service. On April 30, 1995, the NSFNET project came to an end, when the NSFNET backbone service was decommissioned and replaced by a new Internet architecture with commercial Internet service providers (ISPs) interconnected at Network Access Points provided by multiple providers across the country. === Bringing the Internet to Michigan: 1985 to 2001 === During the 1980s, Merit Network grew to serve eight member universities, with Oakland University joining in 1985 and Central Michigan University, Eastern Michigan University, and Michigan Technological University joining in 1987. In 1990, Merit's board of directors formally changed the organization's name to Merit Network, Inc., and created the name MichNet to refer to Merit's statewide network. The board also approved a staff proposal to allow organizations other than publicly supported universities, referred to as aff
Read more →
Data verification

Data verification is a process in which different types of data are checked for accuracy and inconsistencies after data migration is done. In some domains it is referred to Source Data Verification (SDV), such as in clinical trials. Data verification helps to determine whether data was accurately translated when data is transferred from one source to another, is complete, and supports processes in the new system. During verification, there may be a need for a parallel run of both systems to identify areas of disparity and forestall erroneous data loss. Methods for data verification include double data entry, proofreading and automated verification of data. Proofreading data involves someone checking the data entered against the original document. This is also time-consuming and costly. Automated verification of data can be achieved using one way hashes locally or through use of a SaaS based service such as Q by SoLVBL to provide immutable seals to allow verification of the original data.
Read more →
Data security

Data security or data protection is the process of securing digital information to protect it from online threats. Data security or protection means protecting digital data, such as those in a database, from destructive forces and from the unwanted actions of unauthorized users, such as a cyberattack or a data breach. Data security protects computer hardware, software, storage devices, and the data of user devices. Data security also protects the data of organizations, companies and administrative controls. Data security guarantees the protection of individual data, such as identity documents and bank data, and protects against unauthorized access, theft and loss of individual data. Data security also protects data breaches that occurs in companies and industries. Good security measures in industries reduce the probability of data breaches, and employees can rely on the company with their data and private information to be kept secured while companies can continue to maintain a stable reputation. The CIA Triad (Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability) is what is used to practice what an information security is required to follow. Confidentiality, protects information from being accessed by unauthorized persons. Integrity, makes sure data is trustworthy; and Availability, meaning that data can be accessed by approved users when it is needed; are three goals for data security. Non-repudiation in data security definition, is a device/service that shows where the data originated from and the proof of integrity. == Technologies == === Disk encryption === Disk encryption refers to encryption technology that encrypts data on a hard disk drive. It takes data from a storage device and coverts it into an unreadable format. Disk encryption typically takes form in either software (see disk encryption software) or hardware (see disk encryption hardware) which can be used together. Disk encryption is often referred to as on-the-fly encryption (OTFE) or transparent encryption. Full disk encryption encrypts each individual sector of a disk volume. Files and user data are encrypted to hinder unauthorized users from accessing without a decryption key. A diversifier permits a plaintext of a specific disk sector to be encrypted into different ciphertexts, which does not require additional storage, such as an initialization vector (IV) or message authentication code (MAC). === Software versus hardware-based mechanisms for protecting data === Software-based security solutions encrypt the data to protect it from theft. However, a malicious program or a hacker could corrupt the data to make it unrecoverable, making the system unusable. Hardware-based security solutions prevent read and write access to data, which provides very strong protection against tampering and unauthorized access. Hardware-based security or assisted computer security offers an alternative to software-only computer security. Security tokens such as those using PKCS#11 or a mobile phone may be more secure due to the physical access required in order to be compromised. Access is enabled only when the token is connected and the correct PIN is entered (see two-factor authentication). However, dongles can be used by anyone who can gain physical access to it. Newer technologies in hardware-based security solve this problem by offering full proof of security for data. Working off hardware-based security: A hardware device allows a user to log in, log out and set different levels through manual actions. Many devices use biometric technology to prevent malicious users from logging in, logging out, and changing privilege levels. The current state of a user of the device is read by controllers in peripheral devices such as hard disks. Illegal access by a malicious user or a malicious program is interrupted based on the current state of a user by hard disk and DVD controllers making illegal access to data impossible. Hardware-based access control is more secure than the protection provided by the operating systems as operating systems are vulnerable to malicious attacks by viruses and hackers. The data on hard disks can be corrupted after malicious access is obtained. With hardware-based protection, the software cannot manipulate the user privilege levels. A hacker or a malicious program cannot gain access to secure data protected by hardware or perform unauthorized privileged operations. This assumption is broken only if the hardware itself is malicious or contains a backdoor. The hardware protects the operating system image and file system privileges from being tampered with. Therefore, a completely secure system can be created using a combination of hardware-based security and secure system administration policies. === Backups === Backup is the process of reproducing copies of essential data and storing in a separate, secured place. It is used to ensure data that is lost can be recovered from another source. Backups contains a minimum of one copy of the data that requires preservation. It is considered essential to keep a backup of any data in most industries and the process is recommended for any files of importance to a user. There are 3 types of backups; full backups, incremental backups, and differential backups. Full backups secure all data from a production system, such as a server, database, or other connected data source. It is impossible to lose all data in a full backup if a breach or corruption were to occur. Full backups require a significantly large amount of time to back up and may be time-consuming taking hours to days to complete. Incremental backups only secures changed data since last backup. While all backups are done in full backups, incremental backups only save data that is recently or frequently changed. Incremental backups require lower storage costs making it a prominent solution for growing datasets. === Data Privacy === Data privacy (or information privacy) is the right for individual's data to be secured to obstruct the use of unauthorized access. It gives individuals control over their data and how it can be shared to third parties. The U.S Privacy Protection Law (see Privacy laws of the United States) requires organizations to inform individuals of how their data is collected and when a data breach occurs. By implementing an encryption, it ensures that private data is unreadable to cybercriminals. === Data masking === Data masking of structured data is the process of obscuring (masking) specific data within a database table or cell to ensure that data security is maintained and sensitive information is not exposed to unauthorized personnel. This may include masking the data from users (for example so banking customer representatives can only see the last four digits of a customer's national identity number), developers (who need real production data to test new software releases but should not be able to see sensitive financial data), outsourcing vendors, etc. Data masking is a form of encryption, as it obscures data by modifying particular letters and numbers to keep data concealed and protected from potential hackers. The individual that has access to the code that decrypts the replaced characters are the only ones that can uncover the data. === Data erasure === Data erasure (or data deletion, data destruction) is a method of software-based overwriting that permanently clears all electronic data residing on a hard drive or other digital media to ensure that no sensitive data is lost when an asset is retired or reused. Article 17: Right to be Forgotten states that users have the right to permanently remove all of their private information from their old devices/services to give people more control over their data. Users are able to switch between devices efficiently. == Threats == === Malware === Malware (or malicious software) is designed to destroy, corrupt or gain unauthorized access to a computer for the purpose of stealing, or destroying data. Hackers who use malware typically utilize many types of malware, which includes computer virus, computer worms, ransomware, spyware and Trojan horse to create a vast system of disruption and cause easy data theft. One of the victims of the vast system of disruption includes healthcare workers, who are targeted by compromised systems by infections and then having their data attacked. === Phishing === Phishing is a type of scam that allows hackers to hoax people using psychological and social engineering (using human emotions such as their trust and fear) tactics into giving personal data through emails and messages, and install computer viruses if the individual were to click on a malicious link unknowingly. Attackers are able to create websites that are very similar to original websites, which makes it difficult to detect a fake website, causing individuals to fall for giving in information. Phishing attackers use human emotion to exploit them, such as making them feel fear, urgency, sympathy with the message
Read more →
Token maxxing

Token Maxxing or Token Maxing is a metric used in an attempt to track productivity in the workplace especially for those using Artificial Intelligence (AI) based services. AI services charge for each token which represent units of effort expended by an AI service to solve a problem. Some believe that token consumption equates to productivity and thus can be used as a metric to monitor an employee's work. Supporters believe that higher token usage indicates higher productivity and higher utilization of powerful AI services. This also suggests that those not consuming enough tokens may be less productive and underutilizing powerful AI services. This belief might lead to an environment that incentivizes higher token usage to predict increased productivity. Critics of token maxxing as a metric claim that prudent workers will maximize any metric that management wants increased to gain a workplace advantage. For example: Engineers in the tech industries pressed to consume as many tokens as possible might run several AI agents in tandem, enter longer input prompts, or automate their tasks to maximize their token consumption. To management, this higher token usage may indicate potential productivity, but in reality may cause additional token costs, worker burnout, or actually create more bloated code of lower quality. Another claim is AI service companies potentially benefit from such an emphasis on token consumption and actively encourage the trend. Some developers have publicly advocated the practice. Developer Sigrid Jin, who said he used 50 billion tokens in a single year, has argued that maximizing token consumption is the best way to understand the value of AI, advising others to spend as much on AI usage as they pay in rent to obtain a return on investment. == See Also == Goodhart's law Perverse incentive Jevons Paradox
Read more →
NYSERNet

NYSERNet, Inc. (New York State Education and Research Network), is a non-profit Internet service provider in New York State. It mainly provides Internet access to universities, colleges, museums, health care facilities, primary and secondary schools, and research institutions. == History == NYSERNet was founded in 1986 in Troy, New York. Its founders compared NYSERNet's network with the Erie Canal and considered it the next step in two centuries to draw the country together. NYSERNet's network reaches from Buffalo to New York City. Completed in 1987, it was the first statewide regional IP network in the United States.[1] Initial speed of 56 kbps was upgraded to T1 in 1989 and T3 in 1994. It was the original assignee of AS174 according to RFC1117. This ASN is used today by Cogent Communications for their global network.
Read more →
HTTP Strict Transport Security

HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) is a policy mechanism that helps to protect websites against man-in-the-middle attacks such as protocol downgrade attacks and cookie hijacking. It allows web servers to declare that web browsers (or other complying user agents) should automatically interact with it using only HTTPS connections, which provide Transport Layer Security (TLS/SSL), unlike the insecure HTTP used alone. HSTS is an IETF standards track protocol and is specified in RFC 6797. The HSTS Policy is communicated by the server to the user agent via an HTTP response header field named Strict-Transport-Security. HSTS Policy specifies a period of time during which the user agent should only access the server in a secure fashion. Websites using HSTS often do not accept clear text HTTP, either by rejecting connections over HTTP or systematically redirecting users to HTTPS (though this is not required by the specification). The consequence of this is that a user-agent not capable of doing TLS will not be able to connect to the site. The protection normally only applies after a user has visited the site at least once, relying on the principle of "trust on first use". The way this protection works is that when a user entering or selecting an HTTP (not HTTPS) URL to the site, the client, such as a Web browser, will automatically upgrade to HTTPS without making an HTTP request, thereby preventing any HTTP man-in-the-middle attack from occurring. To counteract this problem, an HSTS preload list maintained by Google Chrome and used by other major web browsers is maintained. If a domain is on this list, the browser skips the initial request and encrypts all communication immediately. Additional domains can be registered at no cost. == Specification history == The HSTS specification was published as RFC 6797 on 19 November 2012 after being approved on 2 October 2012 by the IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. The authors originally submitted it as an Internet Draft on 17 June 2010. With the conversion to an Internet Draft, the specification name was altered from "Strict Transport Security" (STS) to "HTTP Strict Transport Security", because the specification applies only to HTTP. The HTTP response header field defined in the HSTS specification however remains named "Strict-Transport-Security". The last so-called "community version" of the then-named "STS" specification was published on 18 December 2009, with revisions based on community feedback. The original draft specification by Jeff Hodges from PayPal, Collin Jackson, and Adam Barth was published on 18 September 2009. The HSTS specification is based on original work by Jackson and Barth as described in their paper "ForceHTTPS: Protecting High-Security Web Sites from Network Attacks". Additionally, HSTS is the realization of one facet of an overall vision for improving web security, put forward by Jeff Hodges and Andy Steingruebl in their 2010 paper The Need for Coherent Web Security Policy Framework(s). == HSTS mechanism overview == A server implements an HSTS policy by supplying a header over an HTTPS connection (HSTS headers over HTTP are ignored). For example, a server could send a header such that future requests to the domain for the next year (max-age is specified in seconds; 31,536,000 is equal to one non-leap year) use only HTTPS: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000. When a web application issues HSTS Policy to user agents, conformant user agents behave as follows: Automatically turn any insecure links referencing the web application into secure links (e.g. http://example.com/some/page/ will be modified to https://example.com/some/page/ before accessing the server). If the security of the connection cannot be ensured (e.g. the server's TLS certificate is not trusted), the user agent must terminate the connection and should not allow the user to access the web application. This helps protect web application users against some passive (eavesdropping) and active network attacks. A man-in-the-middle attacker has a greatly reduced ability to intercept requests and responses between a user and a web application server while the user's browser has HSTS Policy in effect for that web application. == Applicability == The most important security vulnerability that HSTS can fix is SSL-stripping man-in-the-middle attacks, first publicly introduced by Moxie Marlinspike in his 2009 BlackHat Federal talk "New Tricks For Defeating SSL In Practice". The SSL (and TLS) stripping attack works by transparently converting a secure HTTPS connection into a plain HTTP connection. The user can see that the connection is insecure, but crucially there is no way of knowing whether the connection should be secure. At the time of Marlinspike's talk, many websites did not use TLS/SSL, therefore there was no way of knowing (without prior knowledge) whether the use of plain HTTP was due to an attack, or simply because the website had not implemented TLS/SSL. Additionally, no warnings are presented to the user during the downgrade process, making the attack fairly subtle to all but the most vigilant. Marlinspike's sslstrip tool, presented at Black Hat DC 2009, fully automates the attack. HSTS addresses this problem by informing the browser that connections to the site should always use TLS/SSL. The HSTS header can be stripped by the attacker if this is the user's first visit. Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Microsoft Edge attempt to limit this problem by including a "pre-loaded" list of HSTS sites. Unfortunately this solution cannot scale to include all websites on the internet. See limitations, below. HSTS can also help to prevent having one's cookie-based website login credentials stolen by widely available tools such as Firesheep. Because HSTS is time limited, it is sensitive to attacks involving shifting the victim's computer time e.g. using false NTP packets. == Limitations == The initial request remains unprotected from active attacks if it uses an insecure protocol such as plain HTTP or if the URI for the initial request was obtained over an insecure channel. The same applies to the first request after the activity period specified in the advertised HSTS Policy max-age (sites should set a period of several days or months depending on user activity and behavior). === Solutions with preload list === Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Internet Explorer/Microsoft Edge address this limitation by implementing a "HSTS preloaded list", which is a list that contains known sites supporting HSTS. This list is distributed with the browser so that it uses HTTPS for the initial request to the listed sites as well. As previously mentioned, these pre-loaded lists cannot scale to cover the entire Web. A potential solution might be achieved by using DNS records to declare HSTS Policy, and accessing them securely via DNSSEC, optionally with certificate fingerprints to ensure validity (which requires running a validating resolver to avoid last mile issues). Junade Ali has noted that HSTS is ineffective against the use of false domains; by using DNS-based attacks, it is possible for a man-in-the-middle interceptor to serve traffic from an artificial domain which is not on the HSTS Preload list, this can be made possible by DNS Spoofing Attacks, or simply a domain name that misleadingly resembles the real domain name such as www.example.org instead of www.example.com. Even with an HSTS preloaded list, HSTS cannot prevent advanced attacks against TLS itself, such as the BEAST or CRIME attacks introduced by Juliano Rizzo and Thai Duong. Attacks against TLS itself are orthogonal to HSTS policy enforcement. Neither can it protect against attacks on the server - if someone compromises it, it will happily serve any content over TLS. === Privacy issues === HSTS can be used to near-indelibly tag visiting browsers with recoverable identifying data (supercookies) which can persist in and out of browser "incognito" privacy modes. By creating a web page that makes multiple HTTP requests to selected domains, for example, if twenty browser requests to twenty different domains are used, theoretically over one million visitors can be distinguished (220) due to the resulting requests arriving via HTTP vs. HTTPS; the latter being the previously recorded binary "bits" established earlier via HSTS headers. == Browser support == Chromium and Google Chrome since version 4.0.211.0 Firefox since version 4; with Firefox 17, Mozilla integrates a list of websites supporting HSTS. Opera since version 12 Safari since OS X Mavericks (version 10.9, late 2013) Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 with KB3058515 installed (Released as a Windows Update in June 2015) Microsoft Edge and Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 10 BlackBerry 10 Browser and WebView since BlackBerry OS 10.3.3. == Deployment best practices == Depending on the actual deployment there are certain threats (e.g. cookie injection attacks) t
Read more →
Data security

Data security or data protection is the process of securing digital information to protect it from online threats. Data security or protection means protecting digital data, such as those in a database, from destructive forces and from the unwanted actions of unauthorized users, such as a cyberattack or a data breach. Data security protects computer hardware, software, storage devices, and the data of user devices. Data security also protects the data of organizations, companies and administrative controls. Data security guarantees the protection of individual data, such as identity documents and bank data, and protects against unauthorized access, theft and loss of individual data. Data security also protects data breaches that occurs in companies and industries. Good security measures in industries reduce the probability of data breaches, and employees can rely on the company with their data and private information to be kept secured while companies can continue to maintain a stable reputation. The CIA Triad (Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability) is what is used to practice what an information security is required to follow. Confidentiality, protects information from being accessed by unauthorized persons. Integrity, makes sure data is trustworthy; and Availability, meaning that data can be accessed by approved users when it is needed; are three goals for data security. Non-repudiation in data security definition, is a device/service that shows where the data originated from and the proof of integrity. == Technologies == === Disk encryption === Disk encryption refers to encryption technology that encrypts data on a hard disk drive. It takes data from a storage device and coverts it into an unreadable format. Disk encryption typically takes form in either software (see disk encryption software) or hardware (see disk encryption hardware) which can be used together. Disk encryption is often referred to as on-the-fly encryption (OTFE) or transparent encryption. Full disk encryption encrypts each individual sector of a disk volume. Files and user data are encrypted to hinder unauthorized users from accessing without a decryption key. A diversifier permits a plaintext of a specific disk sector to be encrypted into different ciphertexts, which does not require additional storage, such as an initialization vector (IV) or message authentication code (MAC). === Software versus hardware-based mechanisms for protecting data === Software-based security solutions encrypt the data to protect it from theft. However, a malicious program or a hacker could corrupt the data to make it unrecoverable, making the system unusable. Hardware-based security solutions prevent read and write access to data, which provides very strong protection against tampering and unauthorized access. Hardware-based security or assisted computer security offers an alternative to software-only computer security. Security tokens such as those using PKCS#11 or a mobile phone may be more secure due to the physical access required in order to be compromised. Access is enabled only when the token is connected and the correct PIN is entered (see two-factor authentication). However, dongles can be used by anyone who can gain physical access to it. Newer technologies in hardware-based security solve this problem by offering full proof of security for data. Working off hardware-based security: A hardware device allows a user to log in, log out and set different levels through manual actions. Many devices use biometric technology to prevent malicious users from logging in, logging out, and changing privilege levels. The current state of a user of the device is read by controllers in peripheral devices such as hard disks. Illegal access by a malicious user or a malicious program is interrupted based on the current state of a user by hard disk and DVD controllers making illegal access to data impossible. Hardware-based access control is more secure than the protection provided by the operating systems as operating systems are vulnerable to malicious attacks by viruses and hackers. The data on hard disks can be corrupted after malicious access is obtained. With hardware-based protection, the software cannot manipulate the user privilege levels. A hacker or a malicious program cannot gain access to secure data protected by hardware or perform unauthorized privileged operations. This assumption is broken only if the hardware itself is malicious or contains a backdoor. The hardware protects the operating system image and file system privileges from being tampered with. Therefore, a completely secure system can be created using a combination of hardware-based security and secure system administration policies. === Backups === Backup is the process of reproducing copies of essential data and storing in a separate, secured place. It is used to ensure data that is lost can be recovered from another source. Backups contains a minimum of one copy of the data that requires preservation. It is considered essential to keep a backup of any data in most industries and the process is recommended for any files of importance to a user. There are 3 types of backups; full backups, incremental backups, and differential backups. Full backups secure all data from a production system, such as a server, database, or other connected data source. It is impossible to lose all data in a full backup if a breach or corruption were to occur. Full backups require a significantly large amount of time to back up and may be time-consuming taking hours to days to complete. Incremental backups only secures changed data since last backup. While all backups are done in full backups, incremental backups only save data that is recently or frequently changed. Incremental backups require lower storage costs making it a prominent solution for growing datasets. === Data Privacy === Data privacy (or information privacy) is the right for individual's data to be secured to obstruct the use of unauthorized access. It gives individuals control over their data and how it can be shared to third parties. The U.S Privacy Protection Law (see Privacy laws of the United States) requires organizations to inform individuals of how their data is collected and when a data breach occurs. By implementing an encryption, it ensures that private data is unreadable to cybercriminals. === Data masking === Data masking of structured data is the process of obscuring (masking) specific data within a database table or cell to ensure that data security is maintained and sensitive information is not exposed to unauthorized personnel. This may include masking the data from users (for example so banking customer representatives can only see the last four digits of a customer's national identity number), developers (who need real production data to test new software releases but should not be able to see sensitive financial data), outsourcing vendors, etc. Data masking is a form of encryption, as it obscures data by modifying particular letters and numbers to keep data concealed and protected from potential hackers. The individual that has access to the code that decrypts the replaced characters are the only ones that can uncover the data. === Data erasure === Data erasure (or data deletion, data destruction) is a method of software-based overwriting that permanently clears all electronic data residing on a hard drive or other digital media to ensure that no sensitive data is lost when an asset is retired or reused. Article 17: Right to be Forgotten states that users have the right to permanently remove all of their private information from their old devices/services to give people more control over their data. Users are able to switch between devices efficiently. == Threats == === Malware === Malware (or malicious software) is designed to destroy, corrupt or gain unauthorized access to a computer for the purpose of stealing, or destroying data. Hackers who use malware typically utilize many types of malware, which includes computer virus, computer worms, ransomware, spyware and Trojan horse to create a vast system of disruption and cause easy data theft. One of the victims of the vast system of disruption includes healthcare workers, who are targeted by compromised systems by infections and then having their data attacked. === Phishing === Phishing is a type of scam that allows hackers to hoax people using psychological and social engineering (using human emotions such as their trust and fear) tactics into giving personal data through emails and messages, and install computer viruses if the individual were to click on a malicious link unknowingly. Attackers are able to create websites that are very similar to original websites, which makes it difficult to detect a fake website, causing individuals to fall for giving in information. Phishing attackers use human emotion to exploit them, such as making them feel fear, urgency, sympathy with the message
Read more →
Inception score

The Inception Score (IS) is an algorithm used to assess the quality of images created by a generative image model such as a generative adversarial network (GAN). The score is calculated based on the output of a separate, pretrained Inception v3 image classification model applied to a sample of (typically around 30,000) images generated by the generative model. The Inception Score is maximized when the following conditions are true: The entropy of the distribution of labels predicted by the Inceptionv3 model for the generated images is minimized. In other words, the classification model confidently predicts a single label for each image. Intuitively, this corresponds to the desideratum of generated images being "sharp" or "distinct". The predictions of the classification model are evenly distributed across all possible labels. This corresponds to the desideratum that the output of the generative model is "diverse". It has been somewhat superseded by the related Fréchet inception distance. While the Inception Score only evaluates the distribution of generated images, the FID compares the distribution of generated images with the distribution of a set of real images ("ground truth"). == Definition == Let there be two spaces, the space of images Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} and the space of labels Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . The space of labels is finite. Let p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} be a probability distribution over Ω X {\displaystyle \Omega _{X}} that we wish to judge. Let a discriminator be a function of type p d i s : Ω X → M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}:\Omega _{X}\to M(\Omega _{Y})} where M ( Ω Y ) {\displaystyle M(\Omega _{Y})} is the set of all probability distributions on Ω Y {\displaystyle \Omega _{Y}} . For any image x {\displaystyle x} , and any label y {\displaystyle y} , let p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} be the probability that image x {\displaystyle x} has label y {\displaystyle y} , according to the discriminator. It is usually implemented as an Inception-v3 network trained on ImageNet. The Inception Score of p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} relative to p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} is I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := exp ⁡ ( E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x ) ] ) {\displaystyle IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\exp \left(\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx\right)\right]\right)} Equivalent rewrites include ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := E x ∼ p g e n [ D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ‖ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ) ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}\left[D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x)\|\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]\right)\right]} ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) := H [ E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] − E x ∼ p g e n [ H [ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) ] ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis}):=H[\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]-\mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[H[p_{dis}(\cdot |x)]]} ln ⁡ I S {\displaystyle \ln IS} is nonnegative by Jensen's inequality. Pseudocode:INPUT discriminator p d i s {\displaystyle p_{dis}} . INPUT generator g {\displaystyle g} . Sample images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator. Compute p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})} , the probability distribution over labels conditional on image x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} . Sum up the results to obtain p ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {p}}} , an empirical estimate of ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle \int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} . Sample more images x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} from generator, and for each, compute D K L ( p d i s ( ⋅ | x i ) ‖ p ^ ) {\displaystyle D_{KL}\left(p_{dis}(\cdot |x_{i})\|{\hat {p}}\right)} . Average the results, and take its exponential. RETURN the result. === Interpretation === A higher inception score is interpreted as "better", as it means that p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is a "sharp and distinct" collection of pictures. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) ∈ [ 0 , ln ⁡ N ] {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})\in [0,\ln N]} , where N {\displaystyle N} is the total number of possible labels. ln ⁡ I S ( p g e n , p d i s ) = 0 {\displaystyle \ln IS(p_{gen},p_{dis})=0} iff for almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) = ∫ p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) p g e n ( x ) d x {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)=\int p_{dis}(\cdot |x)p_{gen}(x)dx} That means p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is completely "indistinct". That is, for any image x {\displaystyle x} sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} , discriminator returns exactly the same label predictions p d i s ( ⋅ | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(\cdot |x)} . The highest inception score N {\displaystyle N} is achieved if and only if the two conditions are both true: For almost all x ∼ p g e n {\displaystyle x\sim p_{gen}} , the distribution p d i s ( y | x ) {\displaystyle p_{dis}(y|x)} is concentrated on one label. That is, H y [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 0 {\displaystyle H_{y}[p_{dis}(y|x)]=0} . That is, every image sampled from p g e n {\displaystyle p_{gen}} is exactly classified by the discriminator. For every label y {\displaystyle y} , the proportion of generated images labelled as y {\displaystyle y} is exactly E x ∼ p g e n [ p d i s ( y | x ) ] = 1 N {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x\sim p_{gen}}[p_{dis}(y|x)]={\frac {1}{N}}} . That is, the generated images are equally distributed over all labels.
Read more →
Knapsack cryptosystems

Knapsack cryptosystems are cryptosystems whose security is based on the hardness of solving the knapsack problem. They remain quite unpopular because simple versions of these algorithms have been broken for several decades. However, that type of cryptosystem is a good candidate for post-quantum cryptography. The most famous knapsack cryptosystem is the Merkle-Hellman Public Key Cryptosystem, one of the first public key cryptosystems, published the same year as the RSA cryptosystem. However, this system has been broken by several attacks: one from Shamir, one by Adleman, and the low density attack. However, there exist modern knapsack cryptosystems that are considered secure so far: among them is Nasako-Murakami 2006. Knapsack cryptosystems, when not subject to classical cryptoanalysis, are believed to be difficult even for quantum computers. That is not the case for systems that rely on factoring large integers, like RSA, or computing discrete logarithms, like ECDSA, problems solved in polynomial time with Shor's algorithm.
Read more →
Business continuity and disaster recovery auditing

Given organizations' increasing dependency on information technology (IT) to run their operations, business continuity planning (and its subset IT service continuity planning) covers the entire organization, while disaster recovery focuses on IT. Auditing documents covering an organization's business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR) plans provides a third-party validation to stakeholders that the documentation is complete and does not contain material misrepresentations. == Overview == Often used together, the terms business continuity (BC) and disaster recovery (DR) are very different. BC refers to the ability of a business to continue critical functions and business processes after the occurrence of a disaster, whereas DR refers specifically to the IT functions of the business, albeit a subset of BC. == Metrics == The primary objective is to protect the organization in the event that all or part of its operations and/or computer services are rendered partially or completely unusable. === DR metrics === Minimizing downtime and data loss during disaster recovery is typically measured in terms of two key concepts: Recovery time objective (RTO), time until a system is completely up and running Recovery point objective (RPO), a measure of the ability to recover files by specifying a point in time the backup copy will restore to. == The auditor's role == Role of the Internal Auditor in Auditing a Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP): 1. Governance & Oversight - Confirm roles, responsibilities, and oversight are defined, and DRP aligns with risk appetite and continuity strategy. 2. Risk Assessment & BIA - Verify risk and impact assessments identify critical systems and define RTO/RPO. 3. Plan Design & Documentation - Ensure the DRP is current, complete, and includes key recovery procedures. 4. Testing & Validation - Confirm regular DRP testing occurs and results are used to improve the plan. 5. Backup & Recovery - Assess backup frequency and recovery capabilities against RTO/RPO targets. 6. Communication & Training - Verify staff are trained and communication protocols are in place for crises. 7. Maintenance & Improvement - Ensure the DRP is regularly updated and lessons learned are integrated. == Documentation == === Disaster recovery plan === A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a documented process or set of procedures to execute an organization's disaster recovery processes and recover and protect a business IT infrastructure in the event of a disaster. It is "a comprehensive statement of consistent actions to be taken before, during and after a disaster". The disaster could be natural, environmental or man-made. Man-made disasters could be intentional (for example, an act of a terrorist) or unintentional (that is, accidental, such as the breakage of a man-made dam or even "fat fingers" - or errant commands entered - on a computer system). ==== Types of plans ==== Although there is no one-size-fits-all plan, there are three basic strategies: prevention, including proper backups, having surge protectors and generators detection, a byproduct of routine inspections, which may discover new (potential) threats correction The latter may include securing proper insurance policies, and holding a "lessons learned" brainstorming session. ==== Best practices ==== To maximize their effectiveness, DRPs are most effective when updated frequently, and should: be an integral part of all business analysis processes, be revisited at every major corporate acquisition, at every new product launch and at every new system development milestone. be thoroughly tested, not just unpracticed bureaucratic documentation Adequate records need to be retained by the organization. The auditor examines records, billings, and contracts to verify that records are being kept. One such record is a current list of the organization's hardware and software vendors. Such list is made and periodically updated to reflect changing business practices and as part of an IT asset management system. Copies of it are stored on and off site and are made available or accessible to those who require them. An auditor tests the procedures used to meet this objective and determine their effectiveness. === Relationship to BCPs === Disaster recovery is a subset of business continuity. Where DRP encompasses the policies, tools and procedures to enable recovery of data following a catastrophic event, BCP involves keeping all aspects of a business functioning regardless of potential disruptive events. As such, a business continuity plan is a comprehensive organizational strategy that includes the DRP as well as threat prevention, detection, recovery, and resumption of operations should a data breach or other disaster event occur. Therefore, BCP consists of five component plans: Business resumption plan Occupant emergency plan Continuity of operations plan Incident management plan Disaster recovery plan The first three components (business resumption, occupant emergency, and continuity of operations plans) do not deal with the IT infrastructure. The incident management plan (IMP) does deal with the IT infrastructure, but since it establishes structure and procedures to address cyber attacks against an organization's IT systems, it generally does not represent an agent for activating the DRP; thus DRP is the only BCP component of active interest to IT. == Testing == The overall categorization of tests are functional- and discussion-based. Types of tests include: tabletop exercises, checklists, simulations, parallel processing (testing recovery site while primary site is in operation), and full interruption (fail over) tests. These apply to both BC and DR. == Benefits == Like every insurance plan, there are benefits that can be obtained from proper business continuity planning, including: Studies have shown a correlation between higher spending on auditing fees and lower rates of Incidents. Minimizing risk of delays Guaranteeing the reliability of standby systems (even automating the failure detection and recovery in certain scenarios) Providing a standard for testing the plan Minimizing decision-making during a disaster Reducing potential legal liabilities Lowering unnecessarily stressful work environment === Planning and testing methodology === According to Geoffrey H. Wold of the Disaster Recovery Journal, the entire process involved in developing a Disaster Recovery Plan consists of 10 steps: Performing a risk assessment: The planning committee prepares a risk analysis and a business impact analysis (BIA) that includes a range of possible disasters. Each functional area of the organization is analyzed to determine potential consequences. Traditionally, fire has posed the greatest threat. A thorough plan provides for "worst case" situations, such as destruction of the main building. Establishing priorities for processing and operations: Critical needs of each department are evaluated and prioritized. Written agreements for alternatives selected are prepared, with details specifying duration, termination conditions, system testing, cost, any special security procedures, procedure for the notification of system changes, hours of operation, the specific hardware and other equipment required for processing, personnel requirements, definition of the circumstances constituting an emergency, process to negotiate service extensions, guarantee of compatibility, availability, non-mainframe resource requirements, priorities, and other contractual issues. Collecting data: This includes various lists (employee backup position listing, critical telephone numbers list, master call list, master vendor list, notification checklist), inventories (communications equipment, documentation, office equipment, forms, insurance policies, workgroup and data center computer hardware, microcomputer hardware and software, office supply, off-site storage location equipment, telephones, etc.), distribution register, software and data files backup/retention schedules, temporary location specifications, any other such lists, materials, inventories, and documentation. Pre-formatted forms are often used to facilitate the data gathering process. Organizing and documenting a written plan Developing testing criteria and procedures: reasons for testing include Determining the feasibility and compatibility of backup facilities and procedures. Identifying areas in the plan that need modification. Providing training to the team managers and team members. Demonstrating the ability of the organization to recover. Providing motivation for maintaining and updating the disaster recovery plan. Testing the plan: An initial "dry run" of the plan is performed by conducting a structured walk-through test. An actual test-run must be performed. Problems are corrected. Initial testing can be plan is done in sections and after normal business hours to minimize disruptions. Subsequent tests occur during normal business hours. === Caveats/controversie
Read more →