AI Face Over

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

• 

  Physical information security

  Physical information security is the intersection or common ground between physical security and information security. It primarily concerns the protection of tangible information-related assets such as computer systems and storage media against physical, real-world threats such as unauthorized physical access, theft, fire and flood. It typically involves physical controls such as protective barriers and locks, uninterruptible power supplies, and shredders. Information security controls in the physical domain complement those in the logical domain (such as encryption), and procedural or administrative controls (such as information security awareness and compliance with policies and laws). == Background == Asset are inherently valuable and yet vulnerable to a wide variety of threats, both malicious (e.g. theft, arson) and accidental/natural (e.g. lost property, bush fire). If threats materialize and exploit those vulnerabilities causing incidents, there are likely to be adverse impacts on the organizations or individuals who legitimately own and utilize the assets, varying from trivial to devastating in effect. Security controls are intended to reduce the probability or frequency of occurrence and/or the severity of the impacts arising from incidents, thus protecting the value of the assets. Physical security involves the use of controls such as smoke detectors, fire alarms and extinguishers, along with related laws, regulations, policies and procedures concerning their use. Barriers such as fences, walls and doors are obvious physical security controls, designed to deter or prevent unauthorized physical access to a controlled area, such as a home or office. The moats and battlements of Mediaeval castles are classic examples of physical access controls, as are bank vaults and safes. Information security controls protect the value of information assets, particularly the information itself (i.e. the intangible information content, data, intellectual property, knowledge etc.) but also computer and telecommunications equipment, storage media (including papers and digital media), cables and other tangible information-related assets (such as computer power supplies). The corporate mantra "Our people are our greatest assets" is literally true in the sense that so-called knowledge workers qualify as extremely valuable, perhaps irreplaceable information assets. Health and safety measures and even medical practice could therefore also be classed as physical information security controls since they protect humans against injuries, diseases and death. This perspective exemplifies the ubiquity and value of information. Modern human society is heavily reliant on information, and information has importance and value at a deeper, more fundamental level. In principle, the subcellular biochemical mechanisms that maintain the accuracy of DNA replication could even be classed as vital information security controls, given that genes are 'the information of life'. Malicious actors who may benefit from physical access to information assets include computer crackers, corporate spies, and fraudsters. The value of information assets is self-evident in the case of, say, stolen laptops or servers that can be sold-on for cash, but the information content is often far more valuable, for example encryption keys or passwords (used to gain access to further systems and information), trade secrets and other intellectual property (inherently valuable or valuable because of the commercial advantages they confer), and credit card numbers (used to commit identity fraud and further theft). Furthermore, the loss, theft or damage of computer systems, plus power interruptions, mechanical/electronic failures and other physical incidents prevent them being used, typically causing disruption and consequential costs or losses. Unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, and even the coercive threat of such disclosure, can be damaging as we saw in the Sony Pictures Entertainment hack at the end of 2014 and in numerous privacy breach incidents. Even in the absence of evidence that disclosed personal information has actually been exploited, the very fact that it is no longer secured and under the control of its rightful owners is itself a potentially harmful privacy impact. Substantial fines, adverse publicity/reputational damage and other noncompliance penalties and impacts that flow from serious privacy breaches are best avoided, regardless of cause! == Examples of physical attacks to obtain information == There are several ways to obtain information through physical attacks or exploitations. A few examples are described below. === Dumpster diving === Dumpster diving is the practice of searching through trash in the hope of obtaining something valuable such as information carelessly discarded on paper, computer disks or other hardware. === Overt access === Sometimes attackers will simply go into a building and take the information they need. Frequently when using this strategy, an attacker will masquerade as someone who belongs in the situation. They may pose as a copy room employee, remove a document from someone's desk, copy the document, replace the original, and leave with the copied document. Individuals pretending to building maintenance may gain access to otherwise restricted spaces. They might walk right out of the building with a trash bag containing sensitive documents, carrying portable devices or storage media that were left out on desks, or perhaps just having memorized a password on a sticky note stuck to someone's computer screen or called out to a colleague across an open office. == Examples of Physical Information Security Controls == Shredding paper documents prior to their disposal can prevent unintended information leakage. Digital data can be encrypted or securely wiped. Offices may require visitors to present valid identification cards or valid access keys. Office workers may be required to obey "clear desk" policies, protecting documents and other storage media (including portable IT devices) by tidying them away out of sight (for example in locked drawers, filing cabinets, safes or a Bank vault). Workers may be required to memorize their passwords or use a password manager instead of writing passwords on paper. Computers are vulnerable to outages caused by power cuts, accidental disconnection, flat batteries, brown-outs, surges, spikes, electrical interference and electronic failures. Physical information security controls to address the associated risks include: fuses, no-break battery-backed power supplies, electrical generators, redundant power sources and cabling, "Do not remove" warning signs on plugs, surge protectors, power quality monitoring, spare batteries, professional design and installation of power circuits plus regular inspections/tests and preventive maintenance.

  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 →
• 

  Conjugate coding

  Conjugate coding is a cryptographic tool, introduced by Stephen Wiesner in the late 1960s. It is part of the two applications Wiesner described for quantum coding, along with a method for creating fraud-proof banking notes. The application that the concept was based on was a method of transmitting multiple messages in such a way that reading one destroys the others. This is called quantum multiplexing and it uses photons polarized in conjugate bases as "qubits" to pass information. Conjugate coding also is a simple extension of a random number generator. At the behest of Charles Bennett, Wiesner published the manuscript explaining the basic idea of conjugate coding with a number of examples but it was not embraced because it was significantly ahead of its time. Because its publication has been rejected, it was developed to the world of public-key cryptography in the 1980s as oblivious transfer, first by Michael Rabin and then by Shimon Even. It is used in the field of quantum computing. The initial concept of quantum cryptography developed by Bennett and Gilles Brassard was also based on this concept.

  Read more →
• 

  Critical data studies

  Critical data studies is the exploration of and engagement with social, cultural, and ethical challenges that arise when working with big data. It is through various unique perspectives and taking a critical approach that this form of study can be practiced. As its name implies, critical data studies draws heavily on the influence of critical theory, which has a strong focus on addressing the organization of power structures. This idea is then applied to the study of data. Interest in this unique field of critical data studies began in 2011 with scholars danah boyd and Kate Crawford posing various questions for the critical study of big data and recognizing its potential threatening impacts on society and culture. It was not until 2014, and more exploration and conversations, that critical data studies was officially coined by scholars Craig Dalton and Jim Thatcher. They put a large emphasis on understanding the context of big data in order to approach it more critically. Researchers such as David Ribes, Robert Soden, Seyram Avle, Sarah E. Fox, and Phoebe Sengers focus on understanding data as a historical artifact and taking an interdisciplinary approach towards critical data studies. Other key scholars in this discipline include Rob Kitchin and Tracey P. Lauriault who focus on reevaluating data through different spheres. Various critical frameworks that can be applied to analyze big data include Feminist, Anti-Racist, Queer, Indigenous, Decolonial, Anti-Ableist, as well as Symbolic and Synthetic data science. These frameworks help to make sense of the data by addressing power, biases, privacy, consent, and underrepresentation or misrepresentation concerns that exist in data as well as how to approach and analyze this data with a more equitable mindset. == Motivation == In their article in which they coin the term 'critical data studies,' Dalton and Thatcher also provide several justifications as to why data studies is a discipline worthy of a critical approach. First, 'big data' is an important aspect of twenty-first century society, and the analysis of 'big data' allows for a deeper understanding of what is happening and for what reasons. Big data is important to critical data studies because it is the type of data used within this field. Big data does not necessarily refer to a large data set, it can have a data set with millions of rows, but also a data set that just has a wide variety and expansive scope of data with a smaller type of dataset. As well as having whole populations in the data set and not just sample sizes. Furthermore, big data as a technological tool and the information that it yields are not neutral, according to Dalton and Thatcher, making it worthy of critical analysis in order to identify and address its biases. Building off this idea, another justification for a critical approach is that the relationship between big data and society is an important one, and therefore worthy of study. Ribes et. al. argue there is a need for an interdisciplinary understanding of data as a historical artifact as a motivating aspect of critical data studies.The overarching consensus in the Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) field, is that people should speak for the data, and not let the data speak for itself. The sources of big data and it’s relationship to varied metadata can be a complicated one, which leads to data disorder and a need for an ethical analysis. Additionally, Iliadis and Russo (2016) have called for studying data assemblages. This is to say, data has innate technological, political, social, and economic histories that should be taken into consideration. Kitchin argues data is almost never raw, and it is almost always cooked, meaning that it is always spoken for by the data scientists utilizing it. Thus, Big Data should be open to a variety of perspectives, especially those of cultural and philosophical nature. Further, data contains hidden histories, ideologies, and philosophies. Big data technology can cause significant changes in society's structure and in the everyday lives of people, and, being a product of society, big data technology is worthy of sociological investigation. Moreover, data sets are almost never completely without any influence. Rather, data are shaped by the vision or goals of those gathering the data, and during the data collection process, certain things are quantified, stored, sorted and even discarded by the research team. A critical approach is thus necessary in order to understand and reveal the intent behind the information being presented.One of these critical approaches has been through feminist data studies. This method applies feminist principles to critical studies and data collecting and analysis. The goal of this is to address the power imbalance in data science and society. According to Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein, a power analysis can be performed by examining power, challenging power, evaluating emotion and embodiment, rethinking binaries and hierarchies, embracing pluralism, considering context, and making labor visible. Feminist data studies is part of the movement towards making data to benefit everyone and not to increase existing inequalities. Moreover, data alone cannot speak for themselves; in order to possess any concrete meaning, data must be accompanied by theoretical insight or alternative quantitative or qualitative research measures. Based on different social topics such as anti-racist data studies, critical data studies give a focus on those social issues concerning data. Specifically in anti-racist data studies they use a classification approach to get representation for those within that community. Desmond Upton Patton and others used their own classification system in the communities of Chicago to help target and reduce violence with young teens on twitter. They had students in those communities help them to decipher the terminology and emojis of these teens to target the language used in tweets that followed with violence outside of the computer screens. This is just one real world example of critical data studies and its application. Dalton and Thatcher argue that if one were to only think of data in terms of its exploitative power, there is no possibility of using data for revolutionary, liberatory purposes. Finally, Dalton and Thatcher propose that a critical approach in studying data allows for 'big data' to be combined with older, 'small data,' and thus create more thorough research, opening up more opportunities, questions and topics to be explored. == Issues and concerns for critical data scholars == Data plays a pivotal role in the emerging knowledge economy, driving productivity, competitiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and capital accumulation. The ethical, political, and economic dimensions of data dynamically evolve across space and time, influenced by changing regimes, technologies, and priorities. Technically, the focus lies on handling, storing, and analyzing vast data sets, utilizing machine learning-based data mining and analytics. This technological advancement raises concerns about data quality, encompassing validity, reliability, authenticity, usability, and lineage. The use of data in modern society brings about new ways of understanding and measuring the world, but also brings with it certain concerns or issues. Data scholars attempt to bring some of these issues to light in their quest to be critical of data. Technical and organizational issues could include the scope of the data set, meaning there is too little or too much data to work with, leading to inaccurate results. It becomes crucial for critical data scholars to carefully consider the adequacy of data volume for their analyses. The quality of the data itself is another facet of concern. The data itself could be of poor quality, such as an incomplete or messy data set with missing or inaccurate data values. This would lead researchers to have to make edits and assumptions about the data itself. Addressing these issues often requires scholars to make edits and assumptions about the data to ensure its reliability and relevance. Data scientists could have improper access to the actual data set, limiting their abilities to analyze it. Linnet Taylor explains how gaps in data can arise when people of varying levels of power have certain rights to their data sources. These people in power can control what data is collected, how it is displayed and how it is analyzed. The capabilities of the research team also play a crucial role in the quality of data analytics. The research team may have inadequate skills or organizational capabilities which leads to the actual analytics performed on the dataset to be biased. This can also lead to ecological fallacies, meaning an assumption is made about an individual based on data or results from a larger group of people. These technical and organizational challenges highlight the complexity of working with data and

  Read more →
• 

  Application permissions

  Permissions are a means of controlling and regulating access to specific system- and device-level functions by software. Typically, types of permissions cover functions that may have privacy implications, such as the ability to access a device's hardware features (including the camera and microphone), and personal data (such as storage devices, contacts lists, and the user's present geographical location). Permissions are typically declared in an application's manifest, and certain permissions must be specifically granted at runtime by the user—who may revoke the permission at any time. Permission systems are common on mobile operating systems, where permissions needed by specific apps must be disclosed via the platform's app store. == Mobile devices == On mobile operating systems for smartphones and tablets, typical types of permissions regulate: Access to storage and personal information, such as contacts, calendar appointments, etc. Location tracking. Access to the device's internal camera and/or microphone. Access to biometric sensors, including fingerprint readers and other health sensors.. Internet access. Access to communications interfaces (including their hardware identifiers and signal strength where applicable, and requests to enable them), such as Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, NFC, and others. Making and receiving phone calls. Sending and reading text messages The ability to perform in-app purchases. The ability to "overlay" themselves within other apps. Installing, deleting and otherwise managing applications. Authentication tokens (e.g., OAuth tokens) from web services stored in system storage for sharing between apps. Prior to Android 6.0 "Marshmallow", permissions were automatically granted to apps at runtime, and they were presented upon installation in Google Play Store. Since Marshmallow, certain permissions now require the app to request permission at runtime by the user. These permissions may also be revoked at any time via Android's settings menu. Usage of permissions on Android are sometimes abused by app developers to gather personal information and deliver advertising; in particular, apps for using a phone's camera flash as a flashlight (which have grown largely redundant due to the integration of such functionality at the system level on later versions of Android) have been known to require a large array of unnecessary permissions beyond what is actually needed for the stated functionality. iOS imposes a similar requirement for permissions to be granted at runtime, with particular controls offered for enabling of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and location tracking. == WebPermissions == WebPermissions is a permission system for web browsers. When a web application needs some data behind permission, it must request it first. When it does it, a user sees a window asking him to make a choice. The choice is remembered, but can be cleared lately. Currently the following resources are controlled: geolocation desktop notifications service workers sensors audio capturing devices, like sound cards, and their model names and characteristics video capturing devices, like cameras, and their identifiers and characteristics == Analysis == The permission-based access control model assigns access privileges for certain data objects to application. This is a derivative of the discretionary access control model. The access permissions are usually granted in the context of a specific user on a specific device. Permissions are granted permanently with few automatic restrictions. In some cases permissions are implemented in 'all-or-nothing' approach: a user either has to grant all the required permissions to access the application or the user can not access the application. There is still a lack of transparency when the permission is used by a program or application to access the data protected by the permission access control mechanism. Even if a user can revoke a permission, the app can blackmail a user by refusing to operate, for example by just crashing or asking user to grant the permission again in order to access the application. The permission mechanism has been widely criticized by researchers for several reasons, including; Intransparency of personal data extraction and surveillance, including the creation of a false sense of security; End-user fatigue of micro-managing access permissions leading to a fatalistic acceptance of surveillance and intransparency; Massive data extraction and personal surveillance carried out once the permissions are granted. Some apps, such as XPrivacy and Mockdroid spoof data in order to act as a measure for privacy. Further transparency methods include longitudinal behavioural profiling and multiple-source privacy analysis of app data access.

  Read more →
• 

  Virtual influencer

  A virtual influencer, sometimes described as a virtual persona or virtual model, is a computer-generated fictional character that can be used for a variety of marketing-related purposes, but most frequently for social media marketing, in lieu of online human "influencers". Most virtual influencers are designed using computer graphics and motion capture technology to resemble real people in realistic situations. Common derivatives of virtual influencers include VTubers, which broadly refer to online entertainers and YouTubers who represent themselves using virtual avatars instead of their physical selves. == History == Virtual influencers are fundamentally synonymous with virtual idols, which originate from Japan's anime and Japanese idol culture that dates back to the 1980s. The first virtual idol created was Lynn Minmay, a fictional singer and main character of the anime television series Super Dimension Fortress Macross (1982) and the animated film adaptation Macross: Do You Remember Love? (1984). Minmay's success led to the production of more Japanese virtual idols, such as EVE from the Japanese cyberpunk anime Megazone 23 (1985), and Sharon Apple in Macross Plus (1994). Virtual idols were not always well received – in 1995, Japanese talent agency Horipro created Kyoko Date, which was inspired by the Macross franchise and dating sim games such as Tokimeki Memorial (1994). Date failed to gain commercial success despite drawing headlines for her debut as a CGI idol, largely due to technical limitations leading to issues such as unnatural movements, an issue also known as the uncanny valley. Since their inception, many virtual idols created have achieved continual success, with notable names including the Vocaloid singer Hatsune Miku, and the VTuber Kizuna AI. Technological advancements have also enabled production teams to use artificial intelligence and advanced techniques to customize the personalities and behavior of virtual idols. Due to modern-day advancements in technology, many virtual idols have held real-life tours and events. Notable ones include Hatsune Miku's titular tour Miku Expo and Hololive's concerts with many of their idols from their English, Japanese and Indonesian branches. Some notable events including virtual singers and influencers have included: Hatsune Miku opening for Lady Gaga in 2014 and Hoshimachi Suisei's concerts at the famous Budokan venue in Japan and her addition to the Forbes Japan list of '30 Under 30' individuals who are changing the world in their respective fields. == Benefits and criticism == From a branding perspective, virtual influencers are perceived to be much less likely to be mired in scandals. In China, celebrities caught in bad publicity such as singer Wang Leehom and entertainer Kris Wu have heightened the appeal of virtual influencers, since their existence relies entirely on computer-generated imagery and they are therefore unlikely to cause any damage to a brand's image by association. Some studies have also suggested that Generation Z consumers have a unique appetite for virtual idols and influencers, since they grew up in the age of the internet. Studies also show that human-like appearance of virtual influencers show higher message credibility than anime-like virtual influencers. Scholars and commentators have also questioned the ethics and cultural impact of virtual influencers, arguing that computer-generated personas can entrench unrealistic beauty standards while diffusing accountability for labor, identity, and consent. Business and marketing analysts have also warned that disclosure and governance remain inconsistent, recommending clearer guardrails and transparency when brands deploy synthetic spokespeople. In 2025, reporting highlighted concerns that AI-driven "virtual humans" could displace human creators and sales workers, intensifying debates over the future of creative labor and authenticity online. == Notable examples == === Virtual bands === Eternity - A South Korean virtual idol group formed by Pulse9. Gorillaz - A virtual band formed in 1998. K/DA - A virtual K-pop girl group created as part of the League of Legends video game franchise. MAVE: - A South Korean virtual girl group formed in 2023 by Metaverse Entertainment. Pentakill - A virtual heavy metal band created as part of the League of Legends video game franchise. Plave (band) - A South Korean virtual boy band formed by VLast. Squid Sisters and Off the Hook - Two virtual pop idol duos as part of the Splatoon series. Studio Killers - A Finnish-Danish-British virtual band formed in 2011. === Vocaloids === Hatsune Miku (modeled after Saki Fujita) Kagamine Rin/Len (modeled after Asami Shimoda) Megurine Luka (modeled after Yū Asakawa) Meiko (modeled after Meiko Haigō) Kaito (modeled after Naoto Fūga) === VTubers === Kano Kizuna AI Neuro-sama VShojo Ironmouse Projekt Melody Nijisanji Hololive Akai Haato Gawr Gura Hoshimachi Suisei Natsuiro Matsuri === Other examples === Ami Yamato Crazy Frog FN Meka IA Kuki AI Kyoko Date Kyra Miquela Naevis Shudu Gram

  Read more →
• 

  Hyper-encryption

  Hyper-encryption is a form of encryption invented by Michael O. Rabin which uses a high-bandwidth source of public random bits, together with a secret key that is shared by only the sender and recipient(s) of the message. It uses the assumptions of Ueli Maurer's bounded-storage model as the basis of its secrecy. Although everyone can see the data, decryption by adversaries without the secret key is still not feasible, because of the space limitations of storing enough data to mount an attack against the system. Unlike almost all other cryptosystems except the one-time pad, hyper-encryption can be proved to be information-theoretically secure, provided the storage bound cannot be surpassed. Moreover, if the necessary public information cannot be stored at the time of transmission, the plaintext can be shown to be impossible to recover, regardless of the computational capacity available to an adversary in the future, even if they have access to the secret key at that future time. A highly energy-efficient implementation of a hyper-encryption chip was demonstrated by Krishna Palem et al. using the Probabilistic CMOS or PCMOS technology and was shown to be ~205 times more efficient in terms of Energy-Performance-Product.

  Read more →
• 

  Commit (data management)

  In computer science and data management, a commit is a behavior that marks the end of a transaction and provides Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, and Durability (ACID) in transactions. The submission records are stored in the submission log for recovery and consistency in case of failure. In terms of transactions, the opposite of committing is giving up tentative changes to the transaction, which is rolled back. Due to the rise of distributed computing and the need to ensure data consistency across multiple systems, commit protocols have been evolving since their emergence in the 1970s. The main developments include the Two-Phase Commit (2PC) first proposed by Jim Gray, which is the fundamental core of distributed transaction management. Subsequently, the Three-phase Commit (3PC), Hypothesis Commit (PC), Hypothesis Abort (PA), and Optimistic Commit protocols gradually emerged, solving the problems of blocking and fault recovery. Today, new fields such as e-commerce payment and blockchain technology are emerging, and submission protocols play a significant role in various business areas. By effectively handling transactions, resolving faults and recovering problems, the commit protocol becomes crucial in ensuring the reliability and consistency of data management. == History == The concept of Commit originated in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when computer technology was rapidly advancing and data management was becoming an important requirement in business and finance. Enterprises have gradually replaced the traditional paper records with computers, which has fully improved the work efficiency. The reliability and consistency of data have become a necessary requirement. Transaction management at this stage is relatively simple, limited to using a single computer for processing. It merely effectively records the changes in data to ensure that the data remains stable after the transaction is completed or terminated. In the late 1970s, as database systems moved from a single calculator operation to multiple distributed collaborations, ensuring data consistency and reliability became a new challenge. In 1978, computer scientist Jim Gray proposed the famous two-phase Commit Protocol (2PC), which became an effective solution for distributed transaction management, successfully managing data synchronization problems between multiple nodes. However, this commit protocol has some potential transaction blocking problems when nodes fail. In the early 1980s, researchers discovered that although the two-step commit protocol was effective at synchronizing data, there could be long waits and even system crashes, with limitations. To improve this problem, people have begun to explore new and effective methods, including enhancing efficiency by reducing message communication during the protocol process. IBM's R database introduced the Assumed Commit and Assumed abort protocols, which contributed significantly to transaction management efficiency. These two protocols have greatly improved the processing efficiency of distributed transactions by reducing communication overhead and have become an important breakthrough in the technology of transaction commit protocols. By the early 1990s, with the increase in business demands and the complexity of transactions, enterprises required higher efficiency in distributed transaction processing. In order to adapt to the needs of different environments, the scientific community has gradually developed various variants of commit protocols to provide more flexible transaction management options for different needs. For example, the three-phase commit protocol promotes the commit of transactions more effectively and reduces the occurrence of blocking problems by adding a pre-commit protocol and a timeout mechanism. In the 21st century, with the popularization of mobile Internet and wireless technology, the commit protocol has been further developed, and researchers have begun to pay attention to how to reduce the blocking in the transaction process to solve the problem of broadband limitation, battery life and network instability in the mobile environment. The proposal of optimistic commit protocol marks the extension of commit technology from traditional database to the emerging mobile data field. This protocol allows transactions to temporarily use unconfirmed data, improving the user experience in cases of poor network conditions. In recent years, with the rise of blockchain and decentralized technologies, submission protocols and consensus mechanisms have gradually merged. These consensus algorithms play a role in tamper-proofing and preventing malicious attacks on node pairs in a decentralized environment. This enables commit to no longer be confined to the scope of traditional database management, but to become the core technology of trust computing and distributed ledgers, further expanding the application field of commit in the digital age. This integration has brought about extensive application impacts. Each transaction can achieve the effect of tracking global submissions through the verification of the consensus mechanism, becoming an important technical foundation for promoting the circulation of digital assets, the operation of cryptocurrencies and decentralized applications. == Commit Protocol Types == In the world of data management, a transaction is a series of database operations, such as bank transfers and order submission. In order to ensure the accuracy, consistency, and security of the data, transactions are usually completed completely, or cancelled completely, leaving no partially completed results. Commit protocol is the method used to coordinate this process. Different protocols are applicable to different submission scenarios and have their own advantages and disadvantages. There are four major commit protocols. === Two-Phase Commit (2PC) === The two-phase commit protocol is the most classic and broadest approach to distributed transactions, which includes both a preparation phase and a commit phase. This commit protocol is designed to allow the database coordinator to determine if all participating nodes agree. The preparation phase is the phase in which the coordination node sends a ready to commit request to all nodes participating in the transaction. The commit phase is a global commit after all participating nodes are ready, and if no agreement is reached, all nodes roll back the transaction and undo all previous operations. Although the two-phase commit protocol is the easiest to operate and widely used, its obvious drawback is that it can cause transactions to be blocked for a long time when nodes fail, resulting in a decline in system performance and making it difficult to terminate or continue immediately. === Three-Phase Commit (3PC) === The three-phase commit protocol is an improved non-blocking protocol based on 2PC, which is divided into three stages: preparation, pre-commit and commit. Firstly, each node sends a "preparation" request. After confirmation, a "pre-submission" stage is added. At this point, each node has completed most of the preparatory work and is waiting for the final confirmation. Finally, in the formal commit stage, after all nodes send the "commit" request, the transaction is completed and committed. Compared with 2PC, it increases the timeout mechanism, avoids the blocking problem caused by single point of failure, and improves the reliability of the system. The three-phase commit protocol significantly optimizes transaction reliability, but adds additional overhead for message transmission and state maintenance. It is more suitable for distributed application scenarios with high transaction sensitivity and no acceptance of long waiting times. === Presumed Commit (PC) and Presumed Abort (PA) === Presumed Commit (PC) is the default that the transaction will be committed successfully and rollback will be notified unless an anomaly is encountered. This commit reduces the message overhead and logging costs of a normal commits. Presumed Abort (PA) is assumed that the default state of the transaction is a rollback and will only be committed when all nodes have explicitly agreed. This commit is applicable to transactions that are not updated frequently or have a low probability of successful commit. The IBM R Distributed Database management System was the first to propose and practice the PC and PA protocols, handling distributed transaction management very efficiently and becoming a classic case in the field of database transaction management. === Optimistic Commit Protocol === With the rise of the Internet, the previous commit protocols are facing new challenges, especially in mobile scenarios with unstable networks. Excessively long transaction waiting times can affect the user experience. The Optimistic Commit Protocol allows a transaction to temporarily access uncommitted data before committing to avoid wait times. This type of commit is suitable f

  Read more →
• 

  AI warfare

  AI warfare refers to the use of artificial intelligence technologies to automate military operation and enhance or bypass human decision-making in armed conflicts. AI is used to rapidly analyze large volumes of military intelligence data, including making recommendations or decisions on who and what to target. Abdul-Rahman al-Rawi, a 20-year-old student, was the first acknowledged civilian killed by AI-assisted airstrike in a U.S. strike in Iraq in 2024. In 2026, the U.S. declared it would become an 'AI-first' warfighting force. Husain et al (2018) coined the term hyperwar to refer to warfare which is algorithmic or controlled by artificial intelligence, with little to no human decision-making. == 2026 Iran war == The 2026 Iran war has been described as the "first AI war", although the Untied States and Israel have previously used AI to identify targets during the Gaza war. The U.S. has used AI tools to attack Iran. These tools have been used for military intelligence, targeting, and damage assessment in the war in Iran. Using the Maven smart system, the U.S. attacked 1,000 targets in the first 24 hours of the war and 5,000 targets over the course of 10 days. While the U.S. had used Maven in 2022 to share targeting information with Ukraine and strike against Iraq, Syria, and against the Houthis in 2024, Iran's attacks are its biggest. Authorities are looking into whether artificial intelligence was involved in the airstrike on an Iranian girls' school that killed 170 civilians, the majority of whom were female students. The United States Central Command emphasized that humans were making final targeting decisions. Per a White House tally released on April 8, the U.S. military hit over 13,000 targets in Iran during the war's first 38 days, including more than 2,000 command-and-control sites, 1,500 air defense targets, and 1,450 industrial infrastructure targets. == Gaza war == As part of the Gaza war, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have used artificial intelligence to rapidly and automatically perform much of the process of determining what to bomb. IDF's Unit 8200 developed AI systems, dubbed the Gospel and Lavender, to find targets for the Israeli Air Force to bomb. The Gospel automatically provides targeting recommendations to human analysts, who decide whether to approve strikes. Lavender identified 37,000 Hamas-linked individuals early in the war, and was used alongside the Gospel, which chooses buildings or structures as targets. According to a report by +972 Magazine and Local Call, strikes assisted by Lavender were routinely permitted to kill 5–20 civilians for each suspected Hamas militant, who were often bombed at home with their families. The IDF denies these claims, maintaining that every strike is assessed to minimize collateral damage, and that there is no policy "to kill tens of thousands of people in their homes." Israel deployed AI technologies during the Gaza war for audio analysis, facial recognition, and airstrike targeting. One such system was used to help identify the location of Hamas commander Ibrahim Biari through phone call analysis, leading to strikes that killed him as well as more than 125 civilians. == 2022 Russian Ukraine war == Kyiv launched a project with Palantir called Brave1 Dataroom to build AI systems using the extensive combat data Ukraine has gathered since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. The country has also created tools for in-depth airstrike analysis, introduced AI to process large volumes of intelligence, and incorporated these technologies into the planning of long-range strike operations. == Involved companies == Maven Smart System is developed by Palantir. It integrates Anthropic's Claude as its large language model, and uses Amazon's AWS servers as its cloud infrastructure. Since Anthropic's refusal to support autonomous weapons development and domestic surveillance efforts. In its place, other AI firms, including OpenAI, have been brought in to take over that role. == Involved state actors == In 2024, the United States Department of Defense had 800-plus active AI-related projects and requested $1.8 billion in AI funding, with Project Maven and Project Artemis (AI-resistant drones developed together with Ukraine) being the main ones. The technology has been used in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Yemen to identify targets. China is pursuing intelligentized warfare, integrating AI across all combat domains—land, sea, air, space, and cyber—with military AI spending exceeding $1.6 billion annually. == International regulation == Since 2014, states meeting within the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons have discussed lethal autonomous weapon systems. In 2016, the treaty's states parties established an open-ended Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems to continue those discussions. The discussions have addressed international humanitarian law, accountability, possible prohibitions and regulations, and the extent of human control required over AI-enabled weapons.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media and psychology

  Social media began in the form of generalized online communities. These online communities formed on websites like Geocities.com in 1994, Theglobe.com in 1995, and Tripod.com in 1995. Many of these early communities focused on social interaction by bringing people together through the use of chat rooms. The chat rooms encouraged users to share personal information, ideas, or even personal web pages. Later the social networking community Classmates took a different approach by simply having people link to each other by using their personal email addresses. By the late 1990s, social networking websites began to develop more advanced features to help users find and manage friends. These newer generation of social networking websites began to flourish with the emergence of SixDegrees.com in 1997, Makeoutclub in 2000, Hub Culture in 2002, and Friendster in 2002. However, the first profitable mass social networking website was the South Korean service, Cyworld. Cyworld initially launched as a blog-based website in 1999 and social networking features were added to the website in 2001. Other social networking websites emerged like Myspace in 2002, LinkedIn in 2003, and Bebo in 2005. In 2009, the social networking website Facebook (launched in 2004) became the largest social networking website in the world. Both Instagram and Kik were launched in October 2010. Active users of Facebook increased from just a million in 2004 to over 750 million by the year 2011. Making internet-based social networking both a cultural and financial phenomenon. In September 2011, Snapchat was launched and reported over 300 million users in 2021. == Psychology of social networking == A social network is a social structure made up of individuals or organizations who communicate and interact with each other. Social networking sites – such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest and LinkedIn – are defined as technology-enabled tools that assist users with creating and maintaining their relationships. A study found that middle schoolers reported using social media to see what their friends are doing, to post pictures, and to connect with friends. Human behavior related to social networking is influenced by major individual differences, meaning that people differ quite systematically in the quantity and quality of their social relationships. Two of the main personality traits that are responsible for this variability are the traits of extraversion and introversion. Extraversion refers to the tendency to be socially dominant, exert leadership, and influence on others. In contrast, introversion reflects a tendency towards shyness, social phobia, or even avoid social situations altogether, which could potentially reduce the number of social contacts a person may have. These individual differences may result in different social networking outcomes. Other psychology factors related to social media and Media psychology are depression, anxiety, attachment, self-identity, well-being, and the need to belong. === Neuroscience === The three domains that neural systems rely on to be strengthened to support social media use are social cognition, self-referential cognition, and social rewarding. When someone posts something on social media, they think of how their audience will react, while the audience thinks of the motivations behind posting the information. Both parties are analyzing the other's thoughts and feelings, which coherently rely on multiple network systems of the brain including the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, bilateral temporoparietal junction, anterior temporal lobes, inferior frontal gyri, and posterior cingulate cortex. All of these systems work to help us process social behaviors and thoughts drawn out on social media. Social media requires a great deal of self-referential thought. People use social media as a platform to express their opinions and show off their past and present selves. In other words, as Bailey Parnell said in her Ted Talk, we're showing off our "highlight reel" (4). When one receives feedback from others, the individual obtains more reflected self-appraisal which leads to comparisons of their social behaviors or "highlights" to other users. Self-referential thought involves activity in the medial prefrontal cortex and the posterior cingulate cortex. The brain uses these systems when thinking of oneself. A 2021 umbrella review found that most associations between adolescent social media use and mental health were characterized as weak or inconsistent, though certain studies identified 'substantial' negative impacts, particularly linked to passive consumption and problematic use. Social media also provides a constant supply of rewards that keeps users coming back for more. Whenever users receive a like or a new follower, it activates the brain's social reward system which includes the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, ventral striatum, and ventral tegmental area. This system has been found to activate in response to positive feedback from peers, suggesting that users experience online acceptance in a similar manner to other material rewards or positive experiences, further acting as a potential reward. While these areas of the brain become strengthened, other parts of the brain start to weaken. Technology is encouraging multi-tasking, especially because of how easy it is to switch from one task to another by opening another tab or using two devices at once. The brain's hippocampus is mainly associated with long-term memory. In a study done by Russell Poldark, a professor at UCLA, they found that "for the task learned without distraction, the hippocampus was involved. However, for the task learned with the distraction of the beeps, the hippocampus was not involved; but the striatum was, which is the brain system that underlies our ability to learn new skills." The study concludes that multitasking can cause reliance on the striatum more than the hippocampus, which can change the way we learn. The striatum is known to be connected to mainly the brain's reward system. The brain will strengthen the neurons to the striatum while it weakens the neurons to the hippocampus to make the brain more efficient. Because our brain starts to rely on the striatum more than the hippocampus, it becomes harder for us to process new information. Nicholas Carr, author of The Shallows: How The Internet Is Changing Our Brains, agrees: "What psychologists and brain scientists tell us about interruptions is that they have a fairly profound effect on the way we think. It becomes much harder to sustain attention, to think about one thing for a long period of time, and to think deeply when new stimuli are pouring at you all day long. I argue that the price we pay for being constantly inundated with information is a loss of our ability to be contemplative and to engage in the kind of deep thinking that requires you to concentrate on one thing." === Well-Being === How does well-being relate to social media? In an article titled Social Impact of Psychological Research on Well-Being Shared in Social Media, Pulido et al. found a 15.7% social impact in their results. These new results were compared to a previous study conducted by Pulido et al., which had a high of 4.98% compared to 27.5% in the new study. These results show the ESISM, which is evidence of social impact present. In a two-year span, the difference between social impact rose 22.52% according to these studies. When taking into consideration that an increasingly large number of teens report either being active on, or having used, some form of social media, ranging from apps such as Facebook to TikTok, researching the effects of social media on the well-being of teens and young adults has become more of a topic of focus in recent years. === Depression === Especially in today's society, social media has gained a new perspective on younger generations. It is what younger generations are born into and are growing up to use, particularly what is running today's society. Social Media has its downfalls regarding depression and mental health. Many users often compare their lives regarding what they see on these platforms. In an article Does Social Media Cause Depression? by the Child Mind Institute, Miller states that "several studies, teenage and young adult users who spend the most time on Instagram, Facebook and other platforms for have shown to have substantially (from 13 to 66 percent) higher rates of reported depression than those who spent the least time", what the study shows how Facebook and Instagram, platforms showcasing daily lives and or lifestyles, or less fulfilling or less satisfied or more flaunting base or superficial. Instead of social community, there has become a perception of individuals striving for a life that is not real, whether that is editing photos or making life seem perfect when it is not. This causes a sense of depression by the weight of a comparing game. In "How Social Media Affects Y

  Read more →
• 

  SIGINT Activity Designator

  A SIGINT Activity Designator (or SIGAD) identifies a signals intelligence (SIGINT) line of collection activity associated with a signals collection station, such as a base or a ship. For example, the SIGAD for Menwith Hill in the UK is USD1000. SIGADs are used by the signals intelligence agencies of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States (the Five Eyes). There are several thousand SIGADs including the substation SIGADs denoted with a trailing alpha character. Several dozen of these are significant. The leaked Boundless Informant reporting screenshot showed that it summarized 504 active SIGADs during a 30-day period in March 2013. == General format == A SIGAD consists of five to eight case insensitive alphanumeric characters. It takes the general form of an alphanumeric designator normally composed of a two- or three-letter prefix followed by one to three numbers. Often a dash is used to separate the alphabetic and numeric characters in the primary part of the designator, but less frequently a space is used as a separator or the alphabetic and numeric characters are concatenated together. An additional alphabetic character can be added to denote a sub-designator for a subset of the primary unit, such as a detachment. Lastly, a numeric character can be added after the aforementioned alphabetic to provide for a sub-sub-designator. In the examples below an X represents an alphabetic character and an N represents a numeric character that are part of the primary designator. Likewise, an x represents an alphabetic character and an n represents a numeric character that are part of a sub-designator. Here are valid generalized examples of SIGADs: The first two characters show which country operates the particular SIGINT facility, which can be US for the United States, UK for the United Kingdom, CA for Canada, AU for Australia and NZ for New Zealand. A third letter shows what sort of staff runs the station. SIGADs beginning with US without a third letter are used for intercept facilities run by the NSA. == PRISM SIGAD == One prominent SIGAD as of April 2013 is US-984XN, with an unclassified codename of PRISM. It is "the number one source of raw intelligence used for NSA analytic reports" according to National Security Agency sources in a document leaked by Edward Snowden. The President's Daily Brief, an all-source intelligence product, cited SIGAD US-984XN as a source in 1,477 items in 2012. The U.S. government operates the PRISM electronic surveillance collection program through NSA's Special Source Operations, an alliance with trusted telecommunications providers. == SIGADs for spy ships == The declassified SIGAD for the USS Liberty (AGTR-5) was USN-855. The USS Liberty incident occurred on 8 June 1967, during the Six-Day War, when Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats attacked the USS Liberty in international waters. The USS Pueblo (AGER-2) was a technical research ship, which was boarded and captured by North Korean forces on 23 January 1968, in what is known as the Pueblo incident. The declassified SIGAD for the NSA Direct Support Unit (DSU) from the Naval Security Group (NSG) on the USS Pueblo patrol involved in the incident was USN-467Y. The USS Pueblo, which officially remains a commissioned vessel of the United States Navy, is the only ship of the U.S. Navy currently being held captive. == Vietnam War SIGADs == The following are the Vietnam War-era declassified SIGADs from inside South Vietnam during the period of 1969 to 1975: Some locations have multiple SIGADs due to different types of collection activities and/or collection at different times during the period. The SIGADs beginning with USA were operated by the United States Air Force's United States Air Force Security Service (USAFSS). The SIGADs beginning with USM were operated by the United States Army's Army Security Agency (ASA). Lastly, the SIGADs beginning with USN were operated by the United States Navy's Naval Security Group (NAVSECGRU). All three of these units have been merged into other units or inactivated. The above list consists of the higher-echelon SIGADs. It does not include the numerous miscellaneous and temporary detachments, or direction finding stations belonging to major units or sites unless that detachment or site was the only one stationed in South Vietnam. Many of the "dets" were short-lived, often formed to support ongoing MACV operations or forward deployments of combat operational or maneuver units. These detachments usually were designated by a letter suffix attached to the higher-echelon SIGAD such as "USM-633J," which was a detachment of the 372d Radio Research Company, USM-633, supporting the United States Army's 25th Infantry Division. === Supporting Southeast Asia SIGADs === The following declassified SIGADs were highly relevant to the Vietnam Campaign, but were located in areas outside of South Vietnam in Southeast Asia. Again, detachments are not listed separately. In the case of the USS Maddox, naval Direct Support Units (DSUs) used the SIGAD USN-467 as a generic designator for their missions. Each specific patrol received a letter suffix for its duration. The subsequent mission would receive the next letter in an alphabetic sequence. Thus, SIGAD USN-467N specifically designates the USS Maddox patrol involved with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. == Joint Base SIGADs == In November 2005, the US Congress performed a fifth round of Base Realignment and Closure. This 2005 law also created twelve joint bases by merging adjacent installations belonging to different services in an effort to reduce costs and improve efficiencies. Joint bases with a primarily SIGINT mission have SIGADs that begin with USJ. A joint base would have a primary SIGAD in the general form of USJ-NNN, where NNN are numeric characters. An actual example is not given, since these units are currently active.

  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 →
• 

  Concurrent MetateM

  Concurrent MetateM is a multi-agent language in which each agent is programmed using a set of (augmented) temporal logic specifications of the behaviour it should exhibit. These specifications are executed directly to generate the behaviour of the agent. As a result, there is no risk of invalidating the logic as with systems where logical specification must first be translated to a lower-level implementation. The root of the MetateM concept is Gabbay's separation theorem; any arbitrary temporal logic formula can be rewritten in a logically equivalent past → future form. Execution proceeds by a process of continually matching rules against a history, and firing those rules when antecedents are satisfied. Any instantiated future-time consequents become commitments which must subsequently be satisfied, iteratively generating a model for the formula made up of the program rules. == Temporal Connectives == The Temporal Connectives of Concurrent MetateM can divided into two categories, as follows: Strict past time connectives: '●' (weak last), '◎' (strong last), '◆' (was), '■' (heretofore), 'S' (since), and 'Z' (zince, or weak since). Present and future time connectives: '◯' (next), '◇' (sometime), '□' (always), 'U' (until), and 'W' (unless). The connectives {◎,●,◆,■,◯,◇,□} are unary; the remainder are binary. === Strict past time connectives === ==== Weak last ==== ●ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in the previous time. If ●ρ is interpreted at the beginning of time, it is satisfied despite there being no actual previous time. Hence "weak" last. ==== Strong last ==== ◎ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in the previous time. If ◎ρ is interpreted at the beginning of time, it is not satisfied because there is no actual previous time. Hence "strong" last. ==== Was ==== ◆ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in any previous moment in time. ==== Heretofore ==== ■ρ is satisfied now if ρ was true in every previous moment in time. ==== Since ==== ρSψ is satisfied now if ψ is true at any previous moment and ρ is true at every moment after that moment. ==== Zince, or weak since ==== ρZψ is satisfied now if (ψ is true at any previous moment and ρ is true at every moment after that moment) OR ψ has not happened in the past. === Present and future time connectives === ==== Next ==== ◯ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true in the next moment in time. ==== Sometime ==== ◇ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true now or in any future moment in time. ==== Always ==== □ρ is satisfied now if ρ is true now and in every future moment in time. ==== Until ==== ρUψ is satisfied now if ψ is true at any future moment and ρ is true at every moment prior. ==== Unless ==== ρWψ is satisfied now if (ψ is true at any future moment and ρ is true at every moment prior) OR ψ does not happen in the future.

  Read more →
• 

  Chaos Communication Congress

  The Chaos Communication Congress is an annual hacker conference organized by the Chaos Computer Club. The congress features a variety of lectures and workshops on technical and political issues related to security, cryptography, privacy and online freedom of speech. It has taken place regularly at the end of the year since 1984, with the current date and duration (27–30 December) established in 2005. It is considered one of the largest events of its kind, alongside DEF CON in Las Vegas. == History == The congress is held in Germany. It started in 1984 in Hamburg, moved to Berlin in 1998, and back to Hamburg in 2012, having exceeded the capacity of the Berlin venue with more than 4500 attendees. Since then, it attracts an increasing number of people: around 6600 attendees in 2012, over 13000 in 2015, and more than 15000 in 2017. From 2017 to 2019, it took place at the Trade Fair Grounds in Leipzig, since the Hamburg venue (CCH) was closed for renovation in 2017 and the existing space was not enough for the growing congress. The congress moved back to Hamburg in 2023, after the renovation of CCH was finished. A large range of speakers are featured. The event is organized by volunteers called Chaos Angels. The non-members entry fee for four days was €100 in 2016, and was raised to €120 in 2018 to include a public transport ticket for the Leipzig area. An important part of the congress are the assemblies, semi-open spaces with clusters of tables and internet connections for groups and individuals to collaborate and socialize in projects, workshops and hands-on talks. These assembly spaces, introduced at the 2012 meeting, combine the hack center project space and distributed group spaces of former years. From 1997 to 2004 the congress also hosted the annual German Lockpicking Championships. 2005 was the first year the Congress lasted four days instead of three and lacked the German Lockpicking Championships. 2020 was the first year where the Congress did not take place at a physical location due to the COVID-19 pandemic, giving way to the first Remote Chaos Experience (rC3). The Chaos Computer Club announced to return to the now newly renovated Congress Center Hamburg for the 37th edition of the Chaos Communication Congress. The announcement confirms the usual date of 27-30 December, notably omitting the year it will be held. On 18 October 2022, they confirmed that the congress will indeed not be held in 2022. On 6 October 2023, the CCC announced that 37C3 will take place again on the usual dates in 2023. === Timeline ===

  Read more →
• 

  Forward anonymity

  Forward anonymity is a property of a cryptographic system which prevents an attacker who has recorded past encrypted communications from discovering its contents and participants in the future. This property is analogous to forward secrecy. An example of a system which uses forward anonymity is a public key cryptography system, where the public key is well-known and used to encrypt a message, and an unknown private key is used to decrypt it. In this system, one of the keys is always said to be compromised, but messages and their participants are still unknown by anyone without the corresponding private key. In contrast, an example of a system which satisfies the perfect forward secrecy property is one in which a compromise of one key by an attacker (and consequent decryption of messages encrypted with that key) does not undermine the security of previously used keys. Forward secrecy does not refer to protecting the content of the message, but rather to the protection of keys used to decrypt messages. == History == Originally introduced by Whitfield Diffie, Paul van Oorschot, and Michael James Wiener to describe a property of STS (station-to-station protocol) involving a long term secret, either a private key or a shared password. == Public Key Cryptography == Public Key Cryptography is a common form of a forward anonymous system. It is used to pass encrypted messages, preventing any information about the message from being discovered if the message is intercepted by an attacker. It uses two keys, a public key and a private key. The public key is published, and is used by anyone to encrypt a plaintext message. The Private key is not well known, and is used to decrypt cyphertext. Public key cryptography is known as an asymmetric decryption algorithm because of different keys being used to perform opposing functions. Public key cryptography is popular because, while it is computationally easy to create a pair of keys, it is extremely difficult to determine the private key knowing only the public key. Therefore, the public key being well known does not allow messages which are intercepted to be decrypted. This is a forward anonymous system because one compromised key (the public key) does not compromise the anonymity of the system. == Web of Trust == A variation of the public key cryptography system is a Web of trust, where each user has both a public and private key. Messages sent are encrypted using the intended recipient's public key, and only this recipient's private key will decrypt the message. They are also signed with the senders private key. This creates added security where it becomes more difficult for an attacker to pretend to be a user, as the lack of a private key signature indicates a non-trusted user. == Limitations == A forward anonymous system does not necessarily mean a wholly secure system. A successful cryptanalysis of a message or sequence of messages can still decode the information without the use of a private key or long term secret. == News == Forward anonymity, along with other privacy-protecting measures, received a burst of media attention after the leak of classified information by Edward Snowden, beginning in June, 2013, which indicated that the NSA and FBI, through specially crafted backdoors in software and computer systems, were conducting mass surveillance over large parts of the population of both the United States (see Mass surveillance in the United States), Europe, Asia, and other parts of the world. They justified this practice as an aid to catch predatory pedophiles. Opponents to this practice argue that leaving in a back door to law enforcement increases the risk of attackers being able to decrypt information, as well as questioning its legality under the US Constitution, specifically being a form of illegal Search and Seizure.

  Read more →