AI Face Fixer

AI Face Fixer — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Hybrid machine translation

  Hybrid machine translation is a method of machine translation that is characterized by the use of multiple machine translation approaches within a single machine translation system. The motivation for developing hybrid machine translation systems stems from the failure of any single technique to achieve a satisfactory level of accuracy. Many hybrid machine translation systems have been successful in improving the accuracy of the translations, and there are several popular machine translation systems which employ hybrid methods. == Approaches == === Multi-engine === This approach to hybrid machine translation involves running multiple machine translation systems in parallel. The final output is generated by combining the output of all the sub-systems. Most commonly, these systems use statistical and rule-based translation subsystems, but other combinations have been explored. For example, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have had some success combining example-based, transfer-based, knowledge-based and statistical translation sub-systems into one machine translation system. === Statistical rule generation === This approach involves using statistical data to generate lexical and syntactic rules. The input is then processed with these rules as if it were a rule-based translator. This approach attempts to avoid the difficult and time-consuming task of creating a set of comprehensive, fine-grained linguistic rules by extracting those rules from the training corpus. This approach still suffers from many problems of normal statistical machine translation, namely that the accuracy of the translation will depend heavily on the similarity of the input text to the text of the training corpus. As a result, this technique has had the most success in domain-specific applications, and has the same difficulties with domain adaptation as many statistical machine translation systems. === Multi-Pass === This approach involves serially processing the input multiple times. The most common technique used in multi-pass machine translation systems is to pre-process the input with a rule-based machine translation system. The output of the rule-based pre-processor is passed to a statistical machine translation system, which produces the final output. This technique is used to limit the amount of information a statistical system need consider, significantly reducing the processing power required. It also removes the need for the rule-based system to be a complete translation system for the language, significantly reducing the amount of human effort and labor necessary to build the system. === Confidence-Based === This approach differs from the other hybrid approaches in that in most cases only one translation technology is used. A confidence metric is produced for each translated sentence from which a decision can be made whether to try a secondary translation technology or to proceed with the initial translation output. SMT is also used when common error patterns such as multiple repeat words appear in sequence, as is common with NMT when the attention mechanism is confused.

  Read more →
• 

  Story (social media)

  In social media, a story is a function in which the user tells a narrative or provides status messages and information in the form of short, time-limited clips in an automatically running sequence. == Definition == A story is a short sequence of images, videos, or other social media content, which can be accompanied by backgrounds, music, text, stickers, animations, filters or emojis. Social media platforms typically advance through the sequence automatically when presenting a story to a viewer. Although the sequential nature of stories can be used to tell a narrative, the pieces of a story can also be unrelated. Social media platforms that offer stories will typically have a primary story for each user which consists of everything the user posted to their story over a certain period of time, usually the most recent 24 hours. Most stories cannot be changed afterwards and are only available for a short time. Stories are almost exclusively created on a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet computer and are usually displayed vertically. == History == In October 2013, Snapchat first introduced the story function as a series of Snaps that can together tell a narrative through a chronological order, with each Snap being viewable by all of the poster's friends and deleted after 24 hours. Stories soon surpassed private Snaps to become Snapchat's most-viewed type of post. After 2015, Snapchat introduced a feature allowing users to post private stories viewable by a chosen subset of their friends. Later other apps would copy this feature. In August 2016, Instagram introduced a stories function that deletes the content after 24 hours. Various commenters have accused the site of copying Snapchat. In February 2017, the instant messenger WhatsApp introduced the Now Status stories function in beta, which was later renamed Status. In March 2017, a story function was introduced in Facebook Messenger. In February 2018, Google launched AMP Stories, bringing a story-style format to certain Google search results on mobile devices. In August 2018, YouTube introduced a stories function that initially was limited to pictures, but was later expanded to support short video clips. The feature was shut down in June 2023. In August 2018, the GIF website Giphy introduced a story function. In March 2022, TikTok added a story feature which allowed users to create 15 second long videos that delete after 24 hours. In June 2023, Telegram CEO Pavel Durov announced stories for Telegram would be released in July 2023. In July 2023, the feature was released for premium users, and in August 2023 it was rolled out for all users. == User motivations == In 2022, a study performed by Jia-Dai (Evelyn) Lu and Jhih-Syuan (Elaine) Lin examined the various motivations for updating stories on Instagram. The researchers found a new configuration of motivations for using Instagram Stories: exploration, self-enhancement, perceived functionality, entertainment, social sharing, relationship building, novelty, and surveillance. The findings also highlighted that contribution and creation activities are likely to result in positive emotions, while creation alone predicts negative emotions while updating stories on Instagram. == Usage statistics == In 2019, around 1.5 billion people worldwide every day on average used the stories function in a social network or messenger. Younger people in particular use this function. More than 20% of people aged 18 to 24 use Instagram stories, while it is just under 2% of those over 55. In a Facebook survey of 18,000 participants from 12 countries, 68% said they used the stories function at least once a month. Stories in the areas of fashion and tourism are particularly popular. The website Fanpage Karma analyzed several Instagram accounts and determined the average reach of posts and stories per follower, concluding that posts have a higher reach than stories, which often have less than half the reach.

  Read more →
• 

  Sumazi

  Sumazi is a social media and social intelligence platform for enterprises, brands, and celebrities. Its technology performs social data analysis across social networking services including Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, to identify key people in his/her network who are experts, influencers or are located in a specific area for marketing, advertising or sales campaigns. The technology company was founded in 2011 by former Sun Microsystems employee Sumaya Kazi. The company was headquartered in San Francisco, California. The company was out of business by 2017. == Reception == Sumazi was one of 25 startups selected out of more than 1,200 to compete at TechCrunch Disrupt Startup Battlefield, where it won the Omidyar Network award for the startup "Most Likely to Change the World." Sumazi, which was based out of San Francisco, California, had been profiled in The New York Times as well as USA Today, which commented the advantages of the startup's location in the Silicon Valley. American Express OPEN Forum also featured Sumazi as a "Startup of the Week". Sumazi has additionally been mentioned in articles by Mashable, The Wall Street Journal, Current Editorials, Harvard Business Review, Smashing Magazine, and TechCrunch.

  Read more →
• 

  Multiple encryption

  Multiple encryption is the process of encrypting an already encrypted message one or more times, either using the same or a different algorithm. It is also known as cascade encryption, cascade ciphering, cipher stacking, multiple encryption, and superencipherment. Superencryption refers to the outer-level encryption of a multiple encryption. Some cryptographers, like Matthew Green of Johns Hopkins University, say multiple encryption addresses a problem that mostly doesn't exist: Modern ciphers rarely get broken... You’re far more likely to get hit by malware or an implementation bug than you are to suffer a catastrophic attack on Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). However, from the previous quote an argument for multiple encryption can be made, namely poor implementation. Using two different cryptomodules and keying processes from two different vendors requires both vendors' wares to be compromised for security to fail completely. == Independent keys == Picking any two ciphers, if the key used is the same for both, the second cipher could possibly undo the first cipher, partly or entirely. This is true of ciphers where the decryption process is exactly the same as the encryption process (a reciprocal cipher) – the second cipher would completely undo the first. If an attacker were to recover the key through cryptanalysis of the first encryption layer, the attacker could possibly decrypt all the remaining layers, assuming the same key is used for all layers. To prevent that risk, one can use keys that are statistically independent for each layer (e.g. independent RNGs). Ideally each key should have separate and different generation, sharing, and management processes. == Independent Initialization Vectors == For en/decryption processes that require sharing an Initialization Vector (IV) / nonce these are typically, openly shared or made known to the recipient (and everyone else). Its good security policy never to provide the same data in both plaintext and ciphertext when using the same key and IV. Therefore, its recommended (although at this moment without specific evidence) to use separate IVs for each layer of encryption. == Importance of the first layer == With the exception of the one-time pad, no cipher has been theoretically proven to be unbreakable. Furthermore, some recurring properties may be found in the ciphertexts generated by the first cipher. Since those ciphertexts are the plaintexts used by the second cipher, the second cipher may be rendered vulnerable to attacks based on known plaintext properties (see references below). This is the case when the first layer is a program P that always adds the same string S of characters at the beginning (or end) of all ciphertexts (commonly known as a magic number). When found in a file, the string S allows an operating system to know that the program P has to be launched in order to decrypt the file. This string should be removed before adding a second layer. To prevent this kind of attack, one can use the method provided by Bruce Schneier: Generate a random pad R of the same size as the plaintext. Encrypt R using the first cipher and key. XOR the plaintext with the pad, then encrypt the result using the second cipher and a different (!) key. Concatenate both ciphertexts in order to build the final ciphertext. A cryptanalyst must break both ciphers to get any information. This will, however, have the drawback of making the ciphertext twice as long as the original plaintext. Note, however, that a weak first cipher may merely make a second cipher that is vulnerable to a chosen plaintext attack also vulnerable to a known plaintext attack. However, a block cipher must not be vulnerable to a chosen plaintext attack to be considered secure. Therefore, the second cipher described above is not secure under that definition, either. Consequently, both ciphers still need to be broken. The attack illustrates why strong assumptions are made about secure block ciphers and ciphers that are even partially broken should never be used. == The Rule of Two == The Rule of Two is a data security principle from the NSA's Commercial Solutions for Classified Program (CSfC). It specifies two completely independent layers of cryptography to protect data. For example, data could be protected by both hardware encryption at its lowest level and software encryption at the application layer. It could mean using two FIPS-validated software cryptomodules from different vendors to en/decrypt data. The importance of vendor and/or model diversity between the layers of components centers around removing the possibility that the manufacturers or models will share a vulnerability. This way if one components is compromised there is still an entire layer of encryption protecting the information at rest or in transit. The CSfC Program offers solutions to achieve diversity in two ways. "The first is to implement each layer using components produced by different manufacturers. The second is to use components from the same manufacturer, where that manufacturer has provided NSA with sufficient evidence that the implementations of the two components are independent of one another." The principle is practiced in the NSA's secure mobile phone called Fishbowl. The phones use two layers of encryption protocols, IPsec and Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP), to protect voice communications. The Samsung Galaxy S9 Tactical Edition is also an approved CSfC Component.

  Read more →
• 

  Macromedia FreeHand

  Macromedia FreeHand (formerly Aldus FreeHand) is a discontinued computer application for creating two-dimensional vector graphics oriented primarily to professional illustration, desktop publishing and content creation for the Web. FreeHand was similar in scope, intended market, and functionality to Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW and Xara Designer Pro. Because of FreeHand's dedicated page layout and text control features, it also compares to Adobe InDesign and QuarkXPress. Professions using FreeHand include graphic design, illustration, cartography, fashion and textile design, product design, architects, scientific research, and multimedia production. FreeHand was created by Altsys Corporation in 1988 and licensed to Aldus Corporation, which released versions 1 through 4. In 1994, Aldus merged with Adobe Systems and because of the overlapping market with Adobe Illustrator, FreeHand was returned to Altsys by order of the Federal Trade Commission. Altsys was later bought by Macromedia, which released FreeHand versions 5 through 11 (FreeHand MX). In 2005, Adobe Systems acquired Macromedia and its product line which included FreeHand MX, under whose ownership it presently resides. Since 2003, FreeHand development has been discontinued; in the Adobe Systems catalog, FreeHand has been replaced by Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand MX continues to run under Windows 11 and under Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) within Rosetta, a PowerPC code emulator, and requires a registration patch supplied by Adobe. FreeHand 10 runs without problems on Mac OS X Snow Leopard with Rosetta enabled, and does not require a registration patch. Later versions of macOS can use a Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server virtual machine to emulate the required PowerPC support. == History == === Altsys and Aldus FreeHand === In 1984, James R. Von Ehr founded Altsys Corporation to develop graphics applications for personal computers. Based in Plano, Texas, the company initially produced font editing and conversion software; Fontastic Plus, Metamorphosis, and the Art Importer. Their premier PostScript font-design package, Fontographer, was released in 1986 and was the first such program on the market. With the PostScript background having been established by Fontographer, Altsys also developed FreeHand (originally called Masterpiece) as a Macintosh Postscript-based illustration program that used Bézier curves for drawing and was similar to Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand was announced as "... a Macintosh graphics program described as having all the features of Adobe's Illustrator plus drawing tools such as those in Mac Paint and Mac Draft and special effects similar to those in Cricket Draw." Seattle's Aldus Corporation acquired a licensing agreement with Altsys Corporation to release FreeHand along with their flagship product, Pagemaker, and Aldus FreeHand 1.0 was released in 1988. FreeHand's product name used intercaps; the F and H were capitalized. The partnership between the two companies continued with Altsys developing FreeHand and with Aldus controlling marketing and sales. After 1988, a competitive exchange between Aldus FreeHand and Adobe Illustrator ensued on the Macintosh platform with each software advancing new tools, achieving better speed, and matching significant features. Windows PC development also allowed Illustrator 2 (aka, Illustrator 88 on the Mac) and FreeHand 3 to release Windows versions to the graphics market. FreeHand 1.0 sold for $495 in 1988. It included the standard drawing tools and features as other draw programs including special effects in fills and screens, text manipulation tools, and full support for CMYK color printing. It was also possible to create and insert PostScript routines anywhere within the program. FreeHand performed in preview mode instead of keyline mode but performance was slower. FreeHand 2.0 sold for $495 in 1989. Besides improving on the features of FreeHand 1.0, FreeHand 2 added faster operation, Pantone colors, stroked text, flexible fill patterns and automatically import graphic assets from other programs. It added accurate control over a color monitor screen display, limited only by its resolution. FreeHand 3.0 sold for $595 in 1991. New features included resizable color, style, and layer panels including an Attributes menu. Also tighter precision of both the existing tools and aligning of objects. FH3 created compound Paths. Text could be converted to paths, applied to an ellipse, or made vertical. Carried over from version 1.0, FreeHand 3 suffered by having text entered into a dialog box instead of directly to the page. In October 1991, a 3.1 upgrade made FreeHand work with System 7 but additionally, it supported pressure-sensitive drawing which offered varying line widths with a users stroke. It improved element manipulation and added more import/export options. FreeHand 4.0 sold for $595 in 1994. Altsys ported FreeHand 3.0 to the NeXT system creating a new program named Virtuoso. Virtuoso continued its development at Altsys and version 2.0 of Virtuoso was feature-equivalent to FreeHand 4 (with the addition of NeXT-specific features such as Services and Display PostScript) and file compatible, with Virtuoso 2 able to open FreeHand 4 files and vice versa. A prominent feature of this version was the ability to type directly into the page and wrap inside or outside any shape. It also included drag-and-drop color imaging, a larger pasteboard, and a user interface that featured floating, rollup panels. The colors palette included a color mixer for adding new colors to the swatch list. Speed increases were made. In the same year of FreeHand 4 release, Adobe Systems announced merger plans with Aldus Corporation for $525 million. Fear about the end of competition between these two leading applications was reported in the media and expressed by customers (Illustrator versus FreeHand and Adobe Photoshop versus Aldus PhotoStyler.) Because of this overlapping of the market, Altsys stepped in by suing Aldus, saying that the merger deal was "a prima facie violation of a non-compete clause within the FreeHand licensing agreement." Altsys CEO Jim Von Ehr explained, "No one loves FreeHand more than we do. We will do whatever it takes to see it survive." The Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against Adobe Systems on October 18, 1994, ordering a divestiture of FreeHand to "remedy the lessening of competition resulting from the acquisition as alleged in the Commission's complaint," and further, the FTC ordering, "That for a period of ten (10) years from the date on which this order becomes final, respondents shall not, without the prior approval of the Commission, directly or indirectly, through subsidiaries, partnerships, or otherwise .. Acquire any Professional Illustration Software or acquire or enter into any exclusive license to Professional Illustration Software;" (referring to FreeHand.) FreeHand was returned to Altsys with all licensing and marketing rights as well as Aldus FreeHand's customer list. === Macromedia Freehand === By late 1994, Altsys still retained all rights to FreeHand. Despite brief plans to keep it in-house to sell it along with Fontographer and Virtuoso, Altsys reached an agreement with the multimedia software company, Macromedia, to be acquired. This mutual agreement provided FreeHand and Fontographer a new home with ample resources for marketing, sales, and competition against the newly merged Adobe-Aldus company. Altsys would remain in Richardson, Texas, but would be renamed as the Digital Arts Group of Macromedia and was responsible for the continued development of FreeHand. Macromedia received FreeHand's 200,000 customers and expanded its traditional product line of multimedia graphics software to illustration and design graphics software. CEO James Von Ehr became a Macromedia vice-president until 1997 when he left to start another venture. FreeHand 5.0 sold for $595 in 1995. This version featured a more customizable and expanded workspace, multiple views, stronger design and editing tools, a report generator, spell check, paragraph styles, multicolor gradient fills up to 64 colors, speed improvements, and it accepted Illustrator plugins. In September 1995, a 5.5 upgrade added Photoshop plug-in support, PDF import capabilities, the Extract feature, inline graphics to text, improved auto-expanding text containers, the Crop feature, and the Create PICT Image feature. A FreeHand 5.5 upgrade was part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (a suite that included Fontographer, Macromedia xRes image editing application, and Extreme 3D animation and modeling application). FreeHand 6.0 in 1996. This version only existed in beta. Some Freehand 7 prerelease versions were released under the Freehand 6 tag. FreeHand 7.0 sold for $399 in 1996, or $449 as part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (see above.) Features included a redesigned user interface that allowed recombining Inspectors, Panel Tabs, Dockable Panels, Smart Cursors,

  Read more →
• 

  Data hub

  A data hub is a center of data exchange that is supported by data science, data engineering, and data warehouse technologies to interact with endpoints such as applications and algorithms. == Features == A data hub differs from a data warehouse in that it is generally unintegrated and often at different grains. It differs from an operational data store because a data hub does not need to be limited to operational data. A data hub differs from a data lake by homogenizing data and possibly serving data in multiple desired formats, rather than simply storing it in one place, and by adding other value to the data such as de-duplication, quality, security, and a standardized set of query services. A data lake tends to store data in one place for availability, and allow/require the consumer to process or add value to the data. Data hubs are ideally the "go-to" place for data within an enterprise, so that many point-to-point connections between callers and data suppliers do not need to be made, and so that the data hub organization can negotiate deliverables and schedules with various data enclave teams, rather than being an organizational free-for-all as different teams try to get new services and features from many other teams.

  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 →
• 

  Forking lemma

  The forking lemma is any of a number of related lemmas in cryptography research. The lemma states that if an adversary (typically a probabilistic Turing machine), on inputs drawn from some distribution, produces an output that has some property with non-negligible probability, then with non-negligible probability, if the adversary is re-run on new inputs but with the same random tape, its second output will also have the property. This concept was first used by David Pointcheval and Jacques Stern in "Security proofs for signature schemes," published in the proceedings of Eurocrypt 1996. In their paper, the forking lemma is specified in terms of an adversary that attacks a digital signature scheme instantiated in the random oracle model. They show that if an adversary can forge a signature with non-negligible probability, then there is a non-negligible probability that the same adversary with the same random tape can create a second forgery in an attack with a different random oracle. The forking lemma was later generalized by Mihir Bellare and Gregory Neven. The forking lemma has been used and further generalized to prove the security of a variety of digital signature schemes and other random-oracle based cryptographic constructions. == Statement of the lemma == The generalized version of the lemma is stated as follows. Let A be a probabilistic algorithm, with inputs (x, h1, ..., hq; r) that outputs a pair (J, y), where r refers to the random tape of A (that is, the random choices A will make). Suppose further that IG is a probability distribution from which x is drawn, and that H is a set of size h from which each of the hi values are drawn according to the uniform distribution. Let acc be the probability that on inputs distributed as described, the J output by A is greater than or equal to 1. We can then define a "forking algorithm" FA that proceeds as follows, on input x: Pick a random tape r for A. Pick h1, ..., hq uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hq; r) to produce (J, y). If J = 0, then return (0, 0, 0). Pick h'J, ..., h'q uniformly from H. Run A on input (x, h1, ..., hJ−1, h'J, ..., h'q; r) to produce (J', y'). If J' = J and hJ ≠ h'J then return (1, y, y'), otherwise, return (0, 0, 0). Let frk be the probability that FA outputs a triple starting with 1, given an input x chosen randomly from IG. Then frk ≥ acc ⋅ ( acc q − 1 h ) . {\displaystyle {\text{frk}}\geq {\text{acc}}\cdot \left({\frac {\text{acc}}{q}}-{\frac {1}{h}}\right).} === Intuition === The idea here is to think of A as running two times in related executions, where the process "forks" at a certain point, when some but not all of the input has been examined. In the alternate version, the remaining inputs are re-generated but are generated in the normal way. The point at which the process forks may be something we only want to decide later, possibly based on the behavior of A the first time around: this is why the lemma statement chooses the branching point (J) based on the output of A. The requirement that hJ ≠ h'J is a technical one required by many uses of the lemma. (Note that since both hJ and h'J are chosen randomly from H, then if h is large, as is usually the case, the probability of the two values not being distinct is extremely small.) === Example === For example, let A be an algorithm for breaking a digital signature scheme in the random oracle model. Then x would be the public parameters (including the public key) A is attacking, and hi would be the output of the random oracle on its ith distinct input. The forking lemma is of use when it would be possible, given two different random signatures of the same message, to solve some underlying hard problem. An adversary that forges once, however, gives rise to one that forges twice on the same message with non-negligible probability through the forking lemma. When A attempts to forge on a message m, we consider the output of A to be (J, y) where y is the forgery, and J is such that m was the Jth unique query to the random oracle (it may be assumed that A will query m at some point, if A is to be successful with non-negligible probability). (If A outputs an incorrect forgery, we consider the output to be (0, y).) By the forking lemma, the probability (frk) of obtaining two good forgeries y and y' on the same message but with different random oracle outputs (that is, with hJ ≠ h'J) is non-negligible when acc is also non-negligible. This allows us to prove that if the underlying hard problem is indeed hard, then no adversary can forge signatures. This is the essence of the proof given by Pointcheval and Stern for a modified ElGamal signature scheme against an adaptive adversary. == Known issues with application of forking lemma == The reduction provided by the forking lemma is not tight. Pointcheval and Stern proposed security arguments for Digital Signatures and Blind Signature using Forking Lemma. Claus P. Schnorr provided an attack on blind Schnorr signatures schemes, with more than p o l y l o g ( n ) {\displaystyle polylog(n)} concurrent executions (the case studied and proven secure by Pointcheval and Stern). A polynomial-time attack, for Ω ( n ) {\displaystyle \Omega (n)} concurrent executions, was shown in 2020 by Benhamouda, Lepoint, Raykova, and Orrù. Schnorr also suggested enhancements for securing blind signatures schemes based on discrete logarithm problem.

  Read more →
• 

  Psychology in cybersecurity

  The psychology of cybersecurity (often intersecting with usable security and cyberpsychology) is an interdisciplinary field studying how human behavior, cognitive biases, and social dynamics influence information security. While traditional cybersecurity focuses on hardware and software vulnerabilities, this discipline addresses the "human factor," which is exploited in cyberattacks. Psychology in cybersecurity draws from cognitive psychology and human–computer interaction. == History and evolution == The challenge of human behavior in computing was noted as early as the 1960s with multi-user mainframes like the Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS). In 1966, a software error on CTSS caused the system's master password file to be displayed to every user upon login—one of the earliest documented security incidents attributable to a combination of system design and human factors. These behaviors gained broader significance in the 1990s as the Internet became widely accessible. High-profile incidents involving figures like Kevin Mitnick demonstrated how human trust could be exploited through social engineering such as pretexting over the phone. == Cognitive and behavioral factors == Much of the psychology of cybersecurity focuses on decision-making under stress or uncertainty. Researchers apply frameworks like dual process theory to explain why humans fall for phishing or business email compromise. Threat actors design malicious communications to trigger fast, emotional "System 1" thinking—using urgency, authority, or panic, which prompts users to click a link or wire funds before their analytical "System 2" can assess the situation's legitimacy. Industry research has consistently documented the effectiveness of these techniques at scale, pointing to several recurring psychological phenomena that influence daily security practices: Cognitive biases: The optimism bias leads users to believe they are unlikely to be targeted by cybercriminals, resulting in lax password practices or delayed software updates. The availability heuristic causes individuals to focus on highly publicized, sophisticated threats while ignoring common, statistically probable risks like credential reuse. Social influence: Attackers leverage established principles of persuasion, such as those categorized by Robert Cialdini. Impersonating a CEO leverages the psychological trigger of authority, while fake tech support scams use reciprocity (offering to fix a problem before asking for network credentials). == Neurological and pre-cognitive factors == Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies show that neural activation in visual and attentional regions decreases with repeated exposure to the same stimulus, a phenomenon termed repetition suppression. Experiments have confirmed this effect in the context of security warnings: static warning designs produce declines in user attention and adherence. Information processing research on phishing indicates that affective cues, such as artificial urgency or fear, increase cognitive load and elicit automatic heuristic processing, reducing the likelihood of analytical evaluation and facilitating compliance with malicious requests. == Security fatigue and organizational dynamics == Aggressive cybersecurity postures can sometimes lead to mental and emotional exhaustion, a phenomenon known as security fatigue. === Alert fatigue === One example is alert fatigue, which most frequently affects both end-users and security operations center analysts. Continuous exposure to browser warnings or antivirus pop-ups, particularly those that are false positives, conditions users to dismiss alerts automatically due to the volume of notifications rather than their repetitive appearance (see § Neurological and pre-cognitive factors). The scale of this problem is significant in enterprise: SOC teams in large organizations receive thousands of alerts daily, and a survey published in ACM Computer Surveys found that analysts spend over 25% of their time handling false positives, meaning that malicious indicators can be buried in the noise. === Password fatigue === Similarly, password fatigue is the feeling experienced by many people who are required to remember an excessive number of passwords as part of their daily routine, such as to log in to a computer at work. Users cope with the memory burden by making predictable, iterative changes to their passwords (such as updating "Password01!" to "Password02!"), which decreases password security.

  Read more →
• 

  Data storage

  Data storage is the recording (storing) of information (data) in a storage medium. Handwriting, phonographic recording, magnetic tape, and optical discs are all examples of storage media. Biological molecules such as RNA and DNA are considered by some as data storage. Recording may be accomplished with virtually any form of energy. Electronic data storage requires electrical power to store and retrieve data. Data stored in a digital, machine-readable medium is called digital data. Computer data storage is one of the core functions of a general-purpose computer. Electronic documents can be stored in much less space than paper documents. Barcodes and magnetic ink character recognition (MICR) are two ways of recording machine-readable data on paper. == Recording media == A recording medium is physical material that holds information. Newly created information is distributed and can be stored in four storage media–print, film, magnetic, and optical–and seen or heard in four information flows–telephone, radio, TV, and the Internet as well as being observed directly. Digital information is stored on electronic media in many different recording formats. With electronic media, the data and the recording media are sometimes referred to as "software" despite the more common use of the word to describe computer software. With (traditional art) static media, art materials such as crayons may be considered both equipment and medium as the wax, charcoal or chalk material from the equipment becomes part of the surface of the medium. Some recording media may be temporary, either by design or by nature. Volatile organic compounds may be used to purposely make data expire over time or to reduce environmental impact. Data such as smoke signals or skywriting are temporary by nature. Depending on the volatility, a gas (e.g., atmosphere, smoke) or a liquid surface such as a lake would be considered a temporary recording medium, if it could be considered a recording medium at all. == Global capacity, digitization, and trends == A 2003 UC Berkeley report estimated that about five exabytes of new information were produced in 2002 and that 92% of this data was stored on magnetic media (primarily hard disk drives). This was about twice the data produced in 1999. The amount of data transmitted over telecommunications systems in 2002 was nearly 18 exabytes—three and a half times more than was recorded on non-volatile storage. Telephone calls constituted 98% of the telecommunicated information in 2002. The researchers' highest estimate for the growth rate of newly stored information (uncompressed) was more than 30% per year. In a more limited study, the International Data Corporation estimated that the total amount of digital data in 2007 was 281 exabytes and that the total amount of digital data produced exceeded the global storage capacity for the first time. A 2011 article in Science estimated that the year 2002 was the beginning of the digital age for information storage: an age in which more information is stored on digital storage devices than on analog storage devices. In 1986, approximately 1% of the world's capacity to store information was in digital format; this grew to 3% by 1993, to 25% by 2000, and to 94% by 2007. These figures correspond to less than three compressed exabytes in 1986, and 295 compressed exabytes in 2007. The quantity of digital storage doubled roughly every three to four years. It is estimated that around 120 zettabytes of data will be generated in 2023, an increase of 60x from 2010, and that it will increase to 181 zettabytes generated in 2025. == Mass storage ==

  Read more →
• 

  Trust federation

  A trust federation is part of the evolving Identity Metasystem that will bring a new layer of persistent identity and trusted data sharing to the Internet. Although the concept of trust federations is technology neutral, several protocols like SAML, OpenID, Information Card, XDI can handle the challenges of technical interoperability. The challenge of business and social interoperability requires a new type of cooperative association similar to a credit card association. Instead of banks, however, a trust federation is an alliance of i-brokers and their customers who agree to abide by a common set of agreements in the care and handling of customer data. A model for trust federations is offered by Open Identity Exchange and Kantara Initiative, which is applied in the U.S. Government ICAM Trust Framework. Some operational trust federations are: InCommon (academic, USA) REFEDs (Research and Education Federations, Europe) IGTF Interoperable Global Trust Federation Portalverbund Government Portal Federation, Austria Trust federations are not limited to the social web use case, but apply to all federations where trust in identity and compliance to other objectives of information security such as confidentiality, integrity and privacy is brokered.

  Read more →
• 

  Correlation immunity

  In mathematics, the correlation immunity of a Boolean function is a measure of the degree to which its outputs are uncorrelated with some subset of its inputs. Specifically, a Boolean function is said to be correlation-immune of order m if every subset of m or fewer variables in x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n}} is statistically independent of the value of f ( x 1 , x 2 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle f(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n})} . == Definition == A function f : F 2 n → F 2 {\displaystyle f:\mathbb {F} _{2}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb {F} _{2}} is k {\displaystyle k} -th order correlation immune if for any independent n {\displaystyle n} binary random variables X 0 … X n − 1 {\displaystyle X_{0}\ldots X_{n-1}} , the random variable Z = f ( X 0 , … , X n − 1 ) {\displaystyle Z=f(X_{0},\ldots ,X_{n-1})} is independent from any random vector ( X i 1 … X i k ) {\displaystyle (X_{i_{1}}\ldots X_{i_{k}})} with 0 ≤ i 1 < … < i k < n {\displaystyle 0\leq i_{1}<\ldots Read more →

• 

  Textual entailment

  In natural language processing, textual entailment (TE), also known as natural language inference (NLI), is a directional relation between text fragments. The relation holds whenever the truth of one text fragment follows from another text. == Definition == In the TE framework, the entailing and entailed texts are termed text (t) and hypothesis (h), respectively. Textual entailment is not the same as pure logical entailment – it has a more relaxed definition: "t entails h" (t ⇒ h) if, typically, a human reading t would infer that h is most likely true. (Alternatively: t ⇒ h if and only if, typically, a human reading t would be justified in inferring the proposition expressed by h from the proposition expressed by t.) The relation is directional because even if "t entails h", the reverse "h entails t" is much less certain. Determining whether this relationship holds is an informal task, one which sometimes overlaps with the formal tasks of formal semantics (satisfying a strict condition will usually imply satisfaction of a less strict conditioned); additionally, textual entailment partially subsumes word entailment. == Examples == Textual entailment can be illustrated with examples of three different relations: An example of a positive TE (text entails hypothesis) is: text: If you help the needy, God will reward you. hypothesis: Giving money to a poor man has good consequences. An example of a negative TE (text contradicts hypothesis) is: text: If you help the needy, God will reward you. hypothesis: Giving money to a poor man has no consequences. An example of a non-TE (text does not entail nor contradict) is: text: If you help the needy, God will reward you. hypothesis: Giving money to a poor man will make you a better person. == Ambiguity of natural language == A characteristic of natural language is that there are many different ways to state what one wants to say: several meanings can be contained in a single text and the same meaning can be expressed by different texts. This variability of semantic expression can be seen as the dual problem of language ambiguity. Together, they result in a many-to-many mapping between language expressions and meanings. The task of paraphrasing involves recognizing when two texts have the same meaning and creating a similar or shorter text that conveys almost the same information. Textual entailment is similar but weakens the relationship to be unidirectional. Mathematical solutions to establish textual entailment can be based on the directional property of this relation, by making a comparison between some directional similarities of the texts involved. == Approaches == Textual entailment measures natural language understanding as it asks for a semantic interpretation of the text, and due to its generality remains an active area of research. Many approaches and refinements of approaches have been considered, such as word embedding, logical models, graphical models, rule systems, contextual focusing, and machine learning. Practical or large-scale solutions avoid these complex methods and instead use only surface syntax or lexical relationships, but are correspondingly less accurate. As of 2005, state-of-the-art systems are far from human performance; a study found humans to agree on the dataset 95.25% of the time. Algorithms from 2016 had not yet achieved 90%. == Applications == Many natural language processing applications, like question answering, information extraction, summarization, multi-document summarization, and evaluation of machine translation systems, need to recognize that a particular target meaning can be inferred from different text variants. Typically entailment is used as part of a larger system, for example in a prediction system to filter out trivial or obvious predictions. Textual entailment also has applications in adversarial stylometry, which has the objective of removing textual style without changing the overall meaning of communication. == Datasets == Some of available English NLI datasets include: SNLI MultiNLI SciTail SICK MedNLI QA-NLI In addition, there are several non-English NLI datasets, as follows: XNLI DACCORD, RTE3-FR, SICK-FR for French FarsTail for Farsi OCNLI for Chinese SICK-NL for Dutch IndoNLI for Indonesian

  Read more →
• 

  Tableau de Concordance

  The Tableau de Concordance was the main French diplomatic code used during World War I; the term also refers to any message sent using the code. It was a superenciphered four-digit code that was changed three times between 1 August 1914 and 15 January 1915. The Tableau de Concordance is considered superenciphered because there is more than one step required to use it. First, each word in a message is replaced by four digits via a codebook. These four digits are divided into three groups (one digit, two digits, one digit) so that when the whole message has been translated into code, the four-digit sets can be put together so it looks like the entire message is made up of two-digit pairs. This is called a "Straddle Gimmick." Then, in turn, each of these two digit pairs (and the single digits at the beginning and end) are replaced by two letters. The letters are then combined with no spaces for the final ciphertext. The manual for the Tableau de Concordance included the instruction that if there was not adequate time for completely enciphering the message, it should simply be sent in clear, because a partially enciphered message would have provided insight into the inner workings of the code.

  Read more →
• 

  Plaintext

  In cryptography, plaintext usually means unencrypted information pending input into cryptographic algorithms, usually encryption algorithms. This usually refers to data that is transmitted or stored unencrypted. == Overview == With the advent of computing, the term plaintext expanded beyond human-readable documents to mean any data, including binary files, in a form that can be viewed or used without requiring a key or other decryption device. Information—a message, document, file, etc.—if to be communicated or stored in an unencrypted form is referred to as plaintext. Plaintext is used as input to an encryption algorithm; the output is usually termed ciphertext, particularly when the algorithm is a cipher. Codetext is less often used, and almost always only when the algorithm involved is actually a code. Some systems use multiple layers of encryption, with the output of one encryption algorithm becoming "plaintext" input for the next. == Secure handling == Insecure handling of plaintext can introduce weaknesses into a cryptosystem by letting an attacker bypass the cryptography altogether. Plaintext is vulnerable in use and in storage, whether in electronic or paper format. Physical security means the securing of information and its storage media from physical, attack—for instance by someone entering a building to access papers, storage media, or computers. Discarded material, if not disposed of securely, may be a security risk. Even shredded documents and erased magnetic media might be reconstructed with sufficient effort. If plaintext is stored in a computer file, the storage media, the computer and its components, and all backups must be secure. Sensitive data is sometimes processed on computers whose mass storage is removable, in which case physical security of the removed disk is vital. In the case of securing a computer, useful (as opposed to handwaving) security must be physical (e.g., against burglary, brazen removal under cover of supposed repair, installation of covert monitoring devices, etc.), as well as virtual (e.g., operating system modification, illicit network access, Trojan programs). Wide availability of keydrives, which can plug into most modern computers and store large quantities of data, poses another severe security headache. A spy (perhaps posing as a cleaning person) could easily conceal one, and even swallow it if necessary. Discarded computers, disk drives and media are also a potential source of plaintexts. Most operating systems do not actually erase anything— they simply mark the disk space occupied by a deleted file as 'available for use', and remove its entry from the file system directory. The information in a file deleted in this way remains fully present until overwritten at some later time when the operating system reuses the disk space. With even low-end computers commonly sold with many gigabytes of disk space and rising monthly, this 'later time' may be months later, or never. Even overwriting the portion of a disk surface occupied by a deleted file is insufficient in many cases. Peter Gutmann of the University of Auckland wrote a celebrated 1996 paper on the recovery of overwritten information from magnetic disks; areal storage densities have gotten much higher since then, so this sort of recovery is likely to be more difficult than it was when Gutmann wrote. Modern hard drives automatically remap failing sectors, moving data to good sectors. This process makes information on those failing, excluded sectors invisible to the file system and normal applications. Special software, however, can still extract information from them. Some government agencies (e.g., US NSA) require that personnel physically pulverize discarded disk drives and, in some cases, treat them with chemical corrosives. This practice is not widespread outside government, however. Garfinkel and Shelat (2003) analyzed 158 second-hand hard drives they acquired at garage sales and the like, and found that less than 10% had been sufficiently sanitized. The others contained a wide variety of readable personal and confidential information. See data remanence. Physical loss is a serious problem. The US State Department, Department of Defense, and the British Secret Service have all had laptops with secret information, including in plaintext, lost or stolen. Appropriate disk encryption techniques can safeguard data on misappropriated computers or media. On occasion, even when data on host systems is encrypted, media that personnel use to transfer data between systems is plaintext because of poorly designed data policy. For example, in October 2007, HM Revenue and Customs lost CDs that contained the unencrypted records of 25 million child benefit recipients in the United Kingdom. Modern cryptographic systems resist known plaintext or even chosen plaintext attacks, and so may not be entirely compromised when plaintext is lost or stolen. Older systems resisted the effects of plaintext data loss on security with less effective techniques—such as padding and Russian copulation to obscure information in plaintext that could be easily guessed.

  Read more →