AI Grammar Detection

AI Grammar Detection — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • ShareMethods

    ShareMethods

    ShareMethods is a Web 2.0 document management and collaboration service with a focus on sales, marketing, and the extended selling network. It offers a software as a service (SaaS) subscription to companies and is available as a stand-alone application or as an integrated program with CRM tools such as Oracle CRM On Demand or salesforce.com. == History == ShareMethods was launched in 2004 to provide collaboration and communication services for sales and marketing teams, business partners, and customers. The founders have a background of building software-as-a-service applications and creating digital media applications. In September 2005, ShareMethods launched "ShareNow" as one of the first applications on the salesforce.com AppExchange. In September 2006, ShareMethods moved its operations into a SAS 70 Type II data center owned by SunGard. In March 2009, ShareMethods launched "ShareSpaces" to provide on-demand portals or workspaces. In 2013, ShareMethods announced that its platform is available in a private cloud (on-premises) version. == Products == ShareMethods: Combines document management, collaboration, analytics, and CRM integration into a single solution. Key content can be centrally managed and delivered to sales channels, while providing feedback to marketing. ShareMethods is often used as a sales portal for internal sales and a partner portal for external partners. ShareNow: Integrates ShareMethods with salesforce.com providing Single Sign On for salesforce.com users and access to files related to accounts opportunities, etc. including custom objects. Also facilitates collaboration between salesforce.com users and non-users. ShareMethods for Oracle CRM On Demand: Integrates ShareMethods with Oracle CRM On Demand providing Single Sign On for Oracle users and easy access to files related to accounts opportunities, etc. ShareOffice: An on-demand intranet/extranet solution. Features include full-text search, version history, server sync-up, email updates, audit trail/analytics, check-in/check-out, multilingual user interface. ShareSpaces: Independent workspaces or portals where users can collaborate with business partners, teammates, or individuals to work together on content and documents. == Integration and interoperability == ShareMethods is available on Salesforce.com's AppExchange platform. ShareMethods also integrates with Oracle CRM On Demand to provide document management within the CRM application. Customers also can integrate proprietary systems via single-sign-on and self-registration. In addition, developers can make use of the ShareMethods API based on WebDAV to integrate document management functionality.

    Read more →
  • Story (social media)

    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 →
  • ISO 15765-2

    ISO 15765-2

    ISO 15765-2, or ISO-TP (Transport Layer), is an international standard for sending data packets over a CAN bus. The protocol allows for the transport of messages that exceed the eight byte maximum payload of CAN frames. ISO-TP segments longer messages into multiple frames, adding metadata (CAN-TP Header) that allows the interpretation of individual frames and reassembly into a complete message packet by the recipient. It can carry up to 232-1 (4294967295) bytes of payload per message packet starting from the 2016 version. Prior versions were limited to a maximum payload size of 4095 bytes. In the OSI model, ISO-TP covers the layer 3 (network layer) and 4 (transport layer). The most common application for ISO-TP is the transfer of diagnostic messages with OBD-II equipped vehicles using KWP2000 and UDS, but is used broadly in other application-specific CAN implementations where one might need to send messages longer than what the CAN protocol physical layer allows (eight bytes for CAN, 64 bytes for CAN FD, and 2048 bytes for CAN-XL). ISO-TP can be operated with its own addressing as so-called Extended Addressing or without address using only the CAN ID (so-called Normal Addressing). Extended addressing uses the first data byte of each frame as an additional element of the address, reducing the application payload by one byte. For clarity the protocol description below is based on Normal Addressing with eight byte CAN frames. In total, six types of addressing are allowed by the ISO 15765-2 Protocol. ISO-TP prepends one or more metadata bytes to the payload data in the eight byte CAN frame, reducing the payload to seven or fewer bytes per frame. The metadata is called the Protocol Control Information, or PCI. The PCI is one, two or three bytes. The initial field is four bits indicating the frame type, and implicitly describing the PCI length. ISO 15765-2 is a part of ISO 15765 (headlined Road vehicles — Diagnostic communication over Controller Area Network (DoCAN)), which has the following parts: ISO 15765-1 Part 1: General information and use case definition ISO 15765-2 Part 2: Transport protocol and network layer services ISO 15765-3 Part 3: Implementation of unified diagnostic services (UDS on CAN) – replaced by ISO 14229-3 Road vehicles — Unified diagnostic services ISO 15765-4 Part 4: Requirements for emissions-related systems == List of protocol control information (PCI) field types == The ISO-TP defines four frame types: A message of seven bytes or less is sent in a single frame, with the initial byte containing the type (0) and payload length (1-7 bytes). With the 0 in the type field, this can also pass as a simpler protocol with a length-data format and is often misinterpreted as such. A message longer than 7 bytes requires segmenting the message packet over multiple frames. A segmented transfer starts with a First Frame. The PCI is two bytes in this case, with the first 4 bit field the type (type 1) and the following 12 bits the message length (excluding the type and length bytes). The recipient confirms the transfer with a flow control frame. The flow control frame has three PCI bytes specifying the interval between subsequent frames and how many consecutive frames may be sent (Block Size). For CAN FD, the ISO 15765-2 protocol has been extended for Single and First frame, to allow larger size values, but still backwards compatible with traditional ISO 15765. See CAN FD. The initial byte contains the type (type = 3) in the first four bits, and a flag in the next four bits indicating if the transfer is allowed (0 = Continue To Send, 1 = Wait, 2 = Overflow/abort). The next byte is the block size, the count of frames that may be sent before waiting for the next flow control frame. A value of zero allows the remaining frames to be sent without flow control or delay. The third byte is the minimum Separation Time (STmin), the minimum delay time between frames. STmin values up to 127 (0x7F) specify the minimum number of milliseconds to delay between frames, while values in the range 241 (0xF1) to 249 (0xF9) specify delays increasing from 100 to 900 microseconds. Note that the Separation Time is defined as the minimum time between the end of one frame to the beginning of the next. Robust implementations should be prepared to accept frames from a sender that misinterprets this as the frame repetition rate i.e. from start-of-frame to start-of-frame. Even careful implementations may fail to account for the minor effect of bit-stuffing in the physical layer. The sender transmits the rest of the message using Consecutive Frames. Each Consecutive Frame has a one byte PCI, with a four bit type (type = 2) followed by a 4-bit sequence number. The sequence number starts at 1 and increments with each frame sent (1, 2,..., F, 0, 1,...), with which lost or discarded frames can be detected. Each consecutive frame starts at 0, initially for the first set of data in the first frame will be considered as 0th data. So the first set of CF(Consecutive frames) start from 0x1. There afterwards when it reaches 0x2F, will be started from 0x20 (e.g. 0x21, 0x22, 0x23...0x2F, 0x20, 0x21...). The 12-bit length field (as indicated in the First Frame) allows up to 4095 bytes of user data in a segmented message, but in practice the typical application-specific limit is considerably lower because of receive buffer or hardware limitations. == Timing parameters == Timing parameters, such as P1 and P2 timers, have to be mentioned. == Standards == ISO 15765-2:2016 Road vehicles -- Diagnostic communication over Controller Area Network (DoCAN) -- Part 2: Transport protocol and network layer services

    Read more →
  • Social media background check

    Social media background check

    A social media background check is an investigative technique that involves scrutinizing the social media profiles and activities of individuals, primarily for pre-employment screening and other official verifications. These checks are performed to review people's online behavioral history on social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Social media background checks have become a common part of recruitment processes, among other verification procedures. == History == In the early 21st century, with the rapid expansion of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, employers began to use these channels to gather additional information about prospective employees. Initially, social media background checks were an informal aspect of recruitment, but they have gradually gained formal recognition as a crucial element in candidate screening. Proponents of social media background checks argue that such reviews provide insight into a candidate's professional interests and networks, though the reliability of such assessments remains contested among researchers. == Rise in society == The practice of social media background checks has seen a significant surge in the last decade. This rise can be attributed to the exponential increase in social media users and the growing awareness among organizations regarding the importance of hiring individuals who align with their values and culture. Various platforms provide services explicitly designed to conduct social media background checks efficiently, simplifying the process for businesses. Companies providing social media background check services, such as Ferretly and Certn, have received venture capital funding, reflecting investor interest in the sector. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into conducting AI-powered social media background checks also illustrates its continued popularity and that businesses are looking to ramp up and even automate their use. High-profile cases in which individuals faced employment or admission consequences for past social media posts have raised awareness of social media background checking practices. For example, director James Gunn faced termination from Marvel Studios in 2018 over past offensive tweets, though he was later rehired. Additionally, multiple college admissions officers have acknowledged reviewing applicants' social media profiles, though such practices vary by institution. == Evolution of ethical considerations == Social media background checks are not without controversy, raising significant ethical considerations that have evolved in recent years. Privacy advocates argue that social media background checks raise concerns about data use and discrimination, particularly given the use of personal information that may not reflect job-relevant behavior. Legal scholars debate whether reviewing publicly posted information constitutes a privacy violation under U.S. law. Researchers and critics note that social media profiles often present curated representations of users' lives and may not reflect workplace behavior or professional competence. Moreover, the accuracy of social media background checks has been called into question, with critics pointing out that these checks may not always yield reliable or comprehensive results. Critics also warn about potential misuse of information obtained from social media, including cyberbullying and harassment. A 2023 study by found that approximately 90% of employers incorporate social media into hiring processes, with over half of those surveyed reporting they had rejected candidates based on social media content. This informal approach operates largely outside federal compliance frameworks. Critics argue that without regulation, candidates lack dispute mechanisms available under regulatory frameworks like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires compliance when background checks formally influence employment decisions. In a hiring environment where the practice is already performed often on an individual basis, the introduction of systematic, regulated screening practices that meet federal compliance standards can present a better, fairer alternative for both employers and candidates. == Business considerations == From a business perspective, social media background checks can be a valuable tool in protecting an organization's reputation and maintaining a safe and respectful workplace environment. A well-conducted social media background check can identify potential red flags, helping to prevent instances of workplace harassment or other negative behaviors. However, businesses also face potential legal repercussions if social media background checks are conducted improperly, such as non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in the United States. Critics argue that over-reliance on social media data may exclude qualified candidates whose professional competence is not reflected in their online presence. The proliferation of social media screening services has prompted legal and industry experts to emphasize the importance of compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and relevant state privacy laws when conducting such checks.

    Read more →
  • Site Security Handbook

    Site Security Handbook

    The Site Security Handbook, RFC 2196, is a guide on setting computer security policies and procedures for sites that have systems on the Internet (however, the information provided should also be useful to sites not yet connected to the Internet). The guide lists issues and factors that a site must consider when setting their own policies. It makes a number of recommendations and provides discussions of relevant areas. This guide is only a framework for setting security policies and procedures. In order to have an effective set of policies and procedures, a site will have to make many decisions, gain agreement, and then communicate and implement these policies. The guide is a product of the IETF SSH working group, and was published in 1997, obsoleting the earlier RFC 1244 from 1991.

    Read more →
  • Government Secure Intranet

    Government Secure Intranet

    Government Secure Intranet (GSi) was a United Kingdom government wide area network, whose main purpose was to enable connected organisations to communicate electronically and securely at low protective marking levels. It was known for the '.gsi.gov.uk' family of domains for government email. Migration away from these domains began in 2019 and was completed in 2023. == History == === Use === Many UK government organisations used the GSi to transfer files on a peer-to-peer (P2P) basis between similarly accredited networks. The network itself was open within the context of its accreditation – it imposed no restrictions on traffic types carried across the network, restrictions and policy control were left to the connecting departments. Email traffic in and out of the network was filtered by an external provider. === Origin === The concept of GSi was defined by the Cabinet Office, and was turned into practical reality by the Internet Special Products group of Cable & Wireless (then known as Mercury Communications) at their Brentford premises. GSi development started late 1996, and can be roughly dated by checking the registration date of its first domain name, 'gsi.net', registered 30 May 1997. The formal go-live date was several months later (according to the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (CCTA) this was February 1998). The main drivers behind the development of GSi was the plethora of inter-agency connections in UK government which made managing security and connectivity budgets problematic. GSi not only provided better oversight, it also normalised connectivity. GSi was designed as an accredited, dual link connected Internet Protocol backbone, it imposed no restrictions on what type of traffic it carried; any restrictions were considered a policy decision for each connecting department. The design of GSi partly supported the then developing eGIF interoperability standards. This was a direct consequence of the two key technical people driving the project, one from Cable & Wireless, one from the UK government in the form of the CCTA. GSi used SMTP as mail transport protocol, and the conversion from the then prevalent X.400 email facilities to SMTP proved for many departments an improvement in reliability and speed. In the case of X.400, this conversion also cut email costs substantially as X.400 message conversions were still chargeable even if the conversion failed due to message size. In some cases, the ROI of such an email conversion was as short as two months. The creation of GSi handed Cable & Wireless a monopoly on UK government data connectivity. GSi can be considered one of the more successful UK government IT projects from the point of view of take up - even when still in pilot phase, demand increased to a point where service windows had to be imposed to continue building the platform to full strength. The development of GSi was also the root of the creation of the CESG Listed Adviser Scheme (CLAS). During the build of GSi, the need for accredited advisers became clear as advice on connectivity invariably involved discussing government confidential matters. CESG eventually responded with the above CLAS scheme. === Operations contract === GSi was operated on a five-year renewable contract basis. Energis won this contract from Cable & Wireless in August 2003. Cable & Wireless then bought Energis in 2005, thus regaining control over the platform. Cable and Wireless Worldwide won the GSi Convergence Framework (GCF) contract in 2011. The GSi and Managed Telecommunications Service (MTS) framework agreements finished in August 2011 with contracts running on to 12 February 2012. GCF is intended to facilitate the migration to the Public Services Network. === Previous developments === Government Connect went live across local authorities in England and Wales. Government Connect is a pan-government programme providing an accredited and secure network between central government and every local authority in England and Wales and allows exchange of RESTRICTED information between authorities. The GCSX network is part of the wider GSi and provides connectivity to nearly all central departments. Scottish local authorities have already established a similar network known as the Government Secure Extranet (GSX). Local authorities with a GCSX connection can now use a GCSX email account to exchange sensitive data, including DWP benefits data, patient identifiable data, with health sector staff who have a NHS.net email address, e.g. PCT staff and GPs. As both GCSX and the Police National Network (PNN) are both connected to the wider Government Secure Intranet (GSi), data can be transferred securely between local authorities and the Police. GC Mail can be used now to replace the existing less efficient and less secure methods of exchanging data between local authorities and the Police. Local authorities that deliver Housing and Council Tax benefits are taking part in the e-Transfers programme, which is e-enabling the process for delivery of Local Authority Input Documents (LAIDs) and Local Authority Claim Information (LACIs). Version 4.1 of the Code of Connection for compliance was introduced in 2010. Compared with version 3.2 the main Code of Connection version 4.1 areas of are: Mobile working - full implementation of compliant service Firewall specification (EAL 4) Execution of unauthorised software Requirement for IT Healthchecks (CHECK / CREST / TigerScheme) Labelling e-mails with protective markings. == Public Services Network == The Public Services Network is a UK Government programme that unified the provision of network infrastructure across the United Kingdom public sector into an interconnected "network of networks". This included large elements of GSi. It is now a legacy network. Centrally procured public sector networks migrated across to the PSN framework as they reached the end of their contract terms, either through an interim framework or directly. The Government Secure Intranet (GSi) contracts expired in September 2011, running on to 12 February 2012 and were replaced by the transitional Government Secure Intranet Convergence Framework (GCF).

    Read more →
  • Scalable Coherent Interface

    Scalable Coherent Interface

    The Scalable Coherent Interface or Scalable Coherent Interconnect (SCI), is a high-speed interconnect standard for shared memory multiprocessing and message passing. The goal was to scale well, provide system-wide memory coherence and a simple interface; i.e. a standard to replace existing buses in multiprocessor systems with one with no inherent scalability and performance limitations. The IEEE Std 1596-1992, IEEE Standard for Scalable Coherent Interface (SCI) was approved by the IEEE standards board on March 19, 1992. It saw some use during the 1990s, but never became widely used and has been replaced by other systems from the early 2000s. == History == Soon after the Fastbus (IEEE 960) follow-on Futurebus (IEEE 896) project in 1987, some engineers predicted it would already be too slow for the high performance computing marketplace by the time it would be released in the early 1990s. In response, a "Superbus" study group was formed in November 1987. Another working group of the standards association of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) spun off to form a standard targeted at this market in July 1988. It was essentially a subset of Futurebus features that could be easily implemented at high speed, along with minor additions to make it easier to connect to other systems, such as VMEbus. Most of the developers had their background from high-speed computer buses. Representatives from companies in the computer industry and research community included Amdahl, Apple Computer, BB&N, Hewlett-Packard, CERN, Dolphin Server Technology, Cray Research, Sequent, AT&T, Digital Equipment Corporation, McDonnell Douglas, National Semiconductor, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Tektronix, Texas Instruments, Unisys, University of Oslo, University of Wisconsin. The original intent was a single standard for all buses in the computer. The working group soon came up with the idea of using point-to-point communication in the form of insertion rings. This avoided the lumped capacitance, limited physical length/speed of light problems and stub reflections in addition to allowing parallel transactions. The use of insertion rings is credited to Manolis Katevenis who suggested it at one of the early meetings of the working group. The working group for developing the standard was led by David B. Gustavson (chair) and David V. James (Vice Chair). David V. James was a major contributor for writing the specifications including the executable C-code. Stein Gjessing’s group at the University of Oslo used formal methods to verify the coherence protocol and Dolphin Server Technology implemented a node controller chip including the cache coherence logic. Different versions and derivatives of SCI were implemented by companies like Dolphin Interconnect Solutions, Convex, Data General AViiON (using cache controller and link controller chips from Dolphin), Sequent and Cray Research. Dolphin Interconnect Solutions implemented a PCI and PCI-Express connected derivative of SCI that provides non-coherent shared memory access. This implementation was used by Sun Microsystems for its high-end clusters, Thales Group and several others including volume applications for message passing within HPC clustering and medical imaging. SCI was often used to implement non-uniform memory access architectures. It was also used by Sequent Computer Systems as the processor memory bus in their NUMA-Q systems. Numascale developed a derivative to connect with coherent HyperTransport. == The standard == The standard defined two interface levels: The physical level that deals with electrical signals, connectors, mechanical and thermal conditions The logical level that describes the address space, data transfer protocols, cache coherence mechanisms, synchronization primitives, control and status registers, and initialization and error recovery facilities. This structure allowed new developments in physical interface technology to be easily adapted without any redesign on the logical level. Scalability for large systems is achieved through a distributed directory-based cache coherence model. (The other popular models for cache coherency are based on system-wide eavesdropping (snooping) of memory transactions – a scheme which is not very scalable.) In SCI each node contains a directory with a pointer to the next node in a linked list that shares a particular cache line. SCI defines a 64-bit flat address space (16 exabytes) where 16 bits are used for identifying a node (65,536 nodes) and 48 bits for address within the node (256 terabytes). A node can contain many processors and/or memory. The SCI standard defines a packet switched network. === Topologies === SCI can be used to build systems with different types of switching topologies from centralized to fully distributed switching: With a central switch, each node is connected to the switch with a ringlet (in this case a two-node ring). In distributed switching systems, each node can be connected to a ring of arbitrary length and either all or some of the nodes can be connected to two or more rings. The most common way to describe these multi-dimensional topologies is k-ary n-cubes (or tori). The SCI standard specification mentions several such topologies as examples. The 2-D torus is a combination of rings in two dimensions. Switching between the two dimensions requires a small switching capability in the node. This can be expanded to three or more dimensions. The concept of folding rings can also be applied to the Torus topologies to avoid any long connection segments. === Transactions === SCI sends information in packets. Each packet consists of an unbroken sequence of 16-bit symbols. The symbol is accompanied by a flag bit. A transition of the flag bit from 0 to 1 indicates the start of a packet. A transition from 1 to 0 occurs 1 (for echoes) or 4 symbols before the packet end. A packet contains a header with address command and status information, payload (from 0 through optional lengths of data) and a CRC check symbol. The first symbol in the packet header contains the destination node address. If the address is not within the domain handled by the receiving node, the packet is passed to the output through the bypass FIFO. In the other case, the packet is fed to a receive queue and may be transferred to a ring in another dimension. All packets are marked when they pass the scrubber (a node is established as scrubber when the ring is initialized). Packets without a valid destination address will be removed when passing the scrubber for the second time to avoid filling the ring with packets that would otherwise circulate indefinitely. === Cache coherence === Cache coherence ensures data consistency in multiprocessor systems. The simplest form applied in earlier systems was based on clearing the cache contents between context switches and disabling the cache for data that were shared between two or more processors. These methods were feasible when the performance difference between the cache and memory were less than one order of magnitude. Modern processors with caches that are more than two orders of magnitude faster than main memory would not perform anywhere near optimal without more sophisticated methods for data consistency. Bus based systems use eavesdropping (snooping) methods since buses are inherently broadcast. Modern systems with point-to point links use broadcast methods with snoop filter options to improve performance. Since broadcast and eavesdropping are inherently non-scalable, these are not used in SCI. Instead, SCI uses a distributed directory-based cache coherence protocol with a linked list of nodes containing processors that share a particular cache line. Each node holds a directory for the main memory of the node with a tag for each line of memory (same line length as the cache line). The memory tag holds a pointer to the head of the linked list and a state code for the line (three states – home, fresh, gone). Associated with each node is also a cache for holding remote data with a directory containing forward and backward pointers to nodes in the linked list sharing the cache line. The tag for the cache has seven states (invalid, only fresh, head fresh, only dirty, head dirty, mid valid, tail valid). The distributed directory is scalable. The overhead for the directory based cache coherence is a constant percentage of the node’s memory and cache. This percentage is in the order of 4% for the memory and 7% for the cache. == Legacy == SCI is a standard for connecting the different resources within a multiprocessor computer system, and it is not as widely known to the public as for example the Ethernet family for connecting different systems. Different system vendors implemented different variants of SCI for their internal system infrastructure. These different implementations interface to very intricate mechanisms in processors and memory systems and each vendor has to preserve some degrees of

    Read more →
  • Multiple encryption

    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 →
  • ROCm

    ROCm

    ROCm is an Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) software stack for graphics processing unit (GPU) programming. ROCm spans several domains, including general-purpose computing on graphics processing units (GPGPU), high performance computing (HPC), and heterogeneous computing. It offers several programming models: HIP (GPU-kernel-based programming), OpenMP (directive-based programming), and OpenCL. ROCm is free, libre and open-source software (except the GPU firmware blobs), and it is distributed under various licenses. The name initially stood for Radeon Open Compute platform; however, due to Open Compute being a registered trademark, the name no longer functions as an acronym. == Background == The first GPGPU software stack from ATI/AMD was Close to Metal, which became Stream. ROCm was launched around 2016 with the Boltzmann Initiative. ROCm stack builds upon previous AMD GPU stacks; some tools trace back to GPUOpen and others to the Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA). === Heterogeneous System Architecture Intermediate Language === HSAIL was aimed at producing a middle-level, hardware-agnostic intermediate representation that could be JIT-compiled to the eventual hardware (GPU, FPGA...) using the appropriate finalizer. This approach was dropped for ROCm: now it builds only GPU code, using LLVM, and its AMDGPU backend that was upstreamed, although there is still research on such enhanced modularity with LLVM MLIR. == Programming abilities == ROCm as a stack ranges from the kernel driver to the end-user applications. AMD has introductory videos about AMD GCN hardware, and ROCm programming via its learning portal. One of the best technical introductions about the stack and ROCm/HIP programming, remains, to date, to be found on Reddit. == Hardware support == ROCm is primarily targeted at discrete professional GPUs, but consumer GPUs and APUs of the same architecture as a supported professional GPU are known to work with ROCm. For example, all professional GPUs of the RDNA 2 architecture are officially supported by ROCm 5.x; users report that Consumer RDNA2 units such as the Radeon 6800M APU and the Radeon 6700XT GPU also work. === Professional-grade GPUs === === Consumer-grade GPUs === == Software ecosystem == === Machine learning === Various deep learning frameworks have a ROCm backend: PyTorch TensorFlow ONNX MXNet CuPy MIOpen Caffe Iree (which uses LLVM Multi-Level Intermediate Representation (MLIR)) llama.cpp === Supercomputing === ROCm is gaining significant traction in the top 500. ROCm is used with the Exascale supercomputers El Capitan and Frontier. Some related software is to be found at AMD Infinity hub. === Other acceleration & graphics interoperation === As of version 3.0, Blender can now use HIP compute kernels for its renderer cycles. === Other languages === ==== Julia ==== Julia has the AMDGPU.jl package, which integrates with LLVM and selects components of the ROCm stack. Instead of compiling code through HIP, AMDGPU.jl uses Julia's compiler to generate LLVM IR directly, which is later consumed by LLVM to generate native device code. AMDGPU.jl uses ROCr's HSA implementation to upload native code onto the device and execute it, similar to how HIP loads its own generated device code. AMDGPU.jl also supports integration with ROCm's rocBLAS (for BLAS), rocRAND (for random number generation), and rocFFT (for FFTs). Future integration with rocALUTION, rocSOLVER, MIOpen, and certain other ROCm libraries is planned. === Software distribution === ==== Official ==== Installation instructions are provided for Linux and Windows in the official AMD ROCm documentation. ROCm software is currently spread across several public GitHub repositories. Within the main public meta-repository, there is an XML manifest for each official release: using git-repo, a version control tool built on top of Git, is the recommended way to synchronize with the stack locally. AMD starts distributing containerized applications for ROCm, notably scientific research applications gathered under AMD Infinity Hub. AMD distributes itself packages tailored to various Linux distributions. ==== Third-party ==== There is a growing third-party ecosystem packaging ROCm. Linux distributions are officially packaging (natively) ROCm, with various degrees of advancement: Arch Linux, Gentoo, Debian, Fedora , GNU Guix, and NixOS. There are Spack packages. == Components == There is one kernel-space component, ROCk, and the rest - there is roughly a hundred components in the stack - is made of user-space modules. The unofficial typographic policy is to use: uppercase ROC lowercase following for low-level libraries, i.e. ROCt, and the contrary for user-facing libraries, i.e. rocBLAS. AMD is active developing with the LLVM community, but upstreaming is not instantaneous, and as of January 2022, is still lagging. AMD still officially packages various LLVM forks for parts that are not yet upstreamed – compiler optimizations destined to remain proprietary, debug support, OpenMP offloading, etc. === Low-level === ==== ROCk – Kernel driver ==== ==== ROCm – Device libraries ==== Support libraries implemented as LLVM bitcode. These provide various utilities and functions for math operations, atomics, queries for launch parameters, on-device kernel launch, etc. ==== ROCt – Thunk ==== The thunk is responsible for all the thinking and queuing that goes into the stack. ==== ROCr – Runtime ==== The ROC runtime is a set of APIs/libraries that allows the launch of compute kernels by host applications. It is AMD's implementation of the HSA runtime API. It is different from the ROC Common Language Runtime. ==== ROCm – CompilerSupport ==== ROCm code object manager is in charge of interacting with LLVM intermediate representation. === Mid-level === ==== ROCclr Common Language Runtime ==== The common language runtime is an indirection layer adapting calls to ROCr on Linux and PAL on windows. It used to be able to route between different compilers, like the HSAIL-compiler. It is now being absorbed by the upper indirection layers (HIP and OpenCL). ==== OpenCL ==== ROCm ships its installable client driver (ICD) loader and an OpenCL implementation bundled together. As of January 2022, ROCm 4.5.2 ships OpenCL 2.2, and is lagging behind competition. ==== HIP – Heterogeneous Interface for Portability ==== The AMD implementation for its GPUs is called HIPAMD. There is also a CPU implementation mostly for demonstration purposes. ==== HIPCC ==== HIP builds a `HIPCC` compiler that either wraps Clang and compiles with LLVM open AMDGPU backend, or redirects to the NVIDIA compiler. ==== HIPIFY ==== HIPIFY is a source-to-source compiling tool. It translates CUDA to HIP and reverse, either using a Clang-based tool, or a sed-like Perl script. ==== GPUFORT ==== Like HIPIFY, GPUFORT is a tool compiling source code into other third-generation-language sources, allowing users to migrate from CUDA Fortran to HIP Fortran. It is also in the repertoire of research projects, even more so. === High-level === ROCm high-level libraries are usually consumed directly by application software, such as machine learning frameworks. Most of the following libraries are in the General Matrix Multiply (GEMM) category, which GPU architecture excels at. The majority of these user-facing libraries comes in dual-form: hip for the indirection layer that can route to Nvidia hardware, and roc for the AMD implementation. ==== rocBLAS / hipBLAS ==== rocBLAS and hipBLAS are central in high-level libraries, it is the AMD implementation for Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms. It uses the library Tensile privately. ==== rocSOLVER / hipSOLVER ==== This pair of libraries constitutes the LAPACK implementation for ROCm and is strongly coupled to rocBLAS. === Utilities === ROCm developer tools: Debug, tracer, profiler, System Management Interface, Validation suite, Cluster management. GPUOpen tools: GPU analyzer, memory visualizer... External tools: radeontop (TUI overview) == Comparison with competitors == ROCm competes with other GPU computing stacks: Nvidia CUDA and Intel OneAPI. === Nvidia CUDA === Nvidia's CUDA is closed-source, whereas AMD ROCm is open source. There is open-source software built on top of the closed-source CUDA, for instance RAPIDS. CUDA is able to run on consumer GPUs, whereas ROCm support is mostly offered for professional hardware such as AMD Instinct and AMD Radeon Pro. Nvidia provides a C/C++-centered frontend and its Parallel Thread Execution (PTX) LLVM GPU backend as the Nvidia CUDA Compiler (NVCC). === Intel OneAPI === All the oneAPI corresponding libraries are published on its GitHub Page. ==== Unified Acceleration Foundation (UXL) ==== Unified Acceleration Foundation (UXL) is a new technology consortium that are working on the continuation of the OneAPI initiative, with the goal to create a new open standard accelerator software ecosystem, related open standards and specification projects through Working Groups and Specia

    Read more →
  • Critical security parameter

    Critical security parameter

    In cryptography, a critical security parameter (CSP) is information that is either user or system defined and is used to operate a cryptography module in processing encryption functions including cryptographic keys and authentication data, such as passwords, the disclosure or modification of which can compromise the security of a cryptographic module or the security of the information protected by the module.

    Read more →
  • Strong secrecy

    Strong secrecy

    Strong secrecy is a term used in formal proof-based cryptography for making propositions about the security of cryptographic protocols. It is a stronger notion of security than syntactic (or weak) secrecy. Strong secrecy is related with the concept of semantic security or indistinguishability used in the computational proof-based approach. Bruno Blanchet provides the following definition for strong secrecy: Strong secrecy means that an adversary cannot see any difference when the value of the secret changes For example, if a process encrypts a message m an attacker can differentiate between different messages, since their ciphertexts will be different. Thus m is not a strong secret. If however, probabilistic encryption were used, m would be a strong secret. The randomness incorporated into the encryption algorithm will yield different ciphertexts for the same value of m.

    Read more →
  • Social Media Working Group Act of 2014

    Social Media Working Group Act of 2014

    The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 (H.R. 4263) is a bill that would direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress. == Background == === Social media === Social media is the social interaction among people in which they create, share or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content." Furthermore, social media depend on mobile and web-based technologies to create highly interactive platforms through which individuals and communities share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content. They introduce substantial and pervasive changes to communication between organizations, communities, and individuals. Social media differ from traditional or industrial media in many ways, including quality, reach, frequency, usability, immediacy, and permanence. === Virtual Social Media Working Group === First responders have increasingly used social media in emergency response and recovery operations. Social media tools are used to connect with citizens after a disaster and share information. The Virtual Social Media Working group (VSMWG) is an online platform that gives advice to first responders on how to safely and effectively use social media in emergency response operations. The working group is made up of subject matter experts from across the U.S. It was created by DHS in December 2010 and gives first responders guidance and best practices regarding the use of social media during emergencies. The DHS S&T and the VSMWG work with local and state governments, academics and nonprofits. Meetings of the VSMWG are chaired by the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Science and Technology. == Provisions of the bill == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Research Service, a public domain source. The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill would require the Group to submit an annual report that includes: (1) a review of current and emerging social media technologies being used to support preparedness and response activities related to terrorist attacks, of best practices and lessons learned on the use of social media during the response to terrorist attacks that occurred during the period covered by the report, and of available training for government officials on the use of social media in response to a terrorist attack; (2) recommendations to improve DHS's use of social media and to improve information sharing among DHS and its components and among state and local governments; and (3) a summary of coordination efforts with the private sector to discuss and resolve legal, operational, technical, privacy, and security concerns. == Congressional Budget Office report == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Budget Office, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security on June 11, 2014. This is a public domain source. H.R. 4263 would direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a working group to provide guidance and best practices on the use of social media technologies, specifically during a terrorist attack or other emergency. The group would prepare guidance for the emergency preparedness and response community. The bill would define the membership of the working group, which would include more than 20 experts from federal, state, local, and tribal governments along with nongovernmental organizations. The working group would be exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act and would be authorized to hold virtual meetings to fulfill the requirement to meet twice a year. The working group would be required to submit an annual report on emerging trends and best practices for emergency response through social media. Based on the cost of similar activities carried out under the DHS Acquisition and Accountability Efficiency Act and the Critical Infrastructure Research and Development Advancement Act of 2013, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the new DHS responsibilities and the annual report required by H.R. 4263 would cost a total of less than $500,000 annually, assuming the availability of appropriated funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. H.R. 4263 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. == Procedural history == The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on March 14, 2014, by Rep. Susan W. Brooks (R, IN-5). It was referred to the United States House Committee on Homeland Security and the United States House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications. On June 19, 2014, it was reported (amended) alongside House Report 113-480. On July 8, 2014, the House voted in Roll Call Vote 369 to pass the bill 375–19. == Debate and discussion == Nate Elliott, a social media expert at Forrester Research, explains that "the hope is when government or another authority tweets something, people will share it for them," but that this often doesn't happen. This problem, that "messages wash away very quickly," is the reason that the federal government is trying to formulate a better social media strategy. Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS), who co-sponsored the bill, stated that "social media has played a crucial role in emergency preparedness and response in Mississippi, including during disasters like Hurricane Isaac and the tornadoes that hit the Hattiesburg area a little over a year ago." He said that their goal with the bill was to "build upon existing public-private partnerships and use social media in a more strategic way in order to help save lives and property."

    Read more →
  • CAMeL-View TestRig

    CAMeL-View TestRig

    CAMeL-View is a software application, which is used for the model based design of mechatronic systems (multi-body simulation, block diagrams, pneumatic systems, hydraulic systems, general simulation, linear analysis and Hardware-in-the-Loop). CAMeL-View enables object-oriented model creation of mechatronic systems through the use of graphic blocks. The basic elements of multi-body system dynamics, control technology, hydraulics and hardware connectivity support the modeling process. The user’s proprietary C-Code can also be integrated into the models, which allows CAMeL-View TestRig to be implemented in all phases of the model based design process ( modeling, physical testing and prototyping), and lends itself especially well to mechatronic system design. The model’s structure is described and displayed with the help of directional connectors. Physical connections (such as mechanical or hydraulic linkages) as well as input and output connections (signal flow) are also available. The input of equations is done via mathematical expressions, e.g. the input of constitutive differential equations in vector and matrix form. Based on the model’s structure, the descriptive equations are converted into non-linear state space representations and converted into executable C-Code. CAMeL-View supports the simulation process with a configurable “experiment environment” (for simulator and instrumentation components) which allows the user to apply simulation models to supported targets (MPC5200, TriCore, X86, etc.) without the need for additional software tools for Hardware-in-the-Loop applications. In addition, the generation of so-called S-Functions for use in Simulink and the generation of ANSI C-Code for use in stand-alone simulators is also supported. A particularly noteworthy feature in CAMeL-View TestRig is the way in which the descriptive equations for multi-body system models are created. All multi-body simulation formalisms used for code generation create their equations in the form of typical explicit differential equations (ODE). This is especially important in Hardware-in-the-Loop applications where the calculation of simulation results within a specific, defined time frame must be assured. Only then is it possible to implement complex multi-body simulation models for Hardware-in-the-Loop applications under stringent real-time conditions. These constraints cannot be met when using DAE-based methods. Additional Toolboxes are available for linear analysis (Eigenvalues, pole-zero analysis, frequency response, etc.) of VRML-based animation. Development of CAMeL-View began in 1991 in the Paderborn Mechatronic Laboratory of Professor Dr. Ing. J. Lückel. The software was based on predecessors that had been developed there since 1986. The name stands for Computer Aided Mechatronic Laboratory – Virtual Engineering Workbench and describes the basic intent of one of the specific demands placed on development engineers in the computer lab.

    Read more →
  • Ciphertext

    Ciphertext

    In cryptography, ciphertext or cyphertext is the result of encryption performed on plaintext using an algorithm, called a cipher. Ciphertext is also known as encrypted or encoded information because it contains a form of the original plaintext that is unreadable by a human or computer without the proper cipher to decrypt it. This process prevents the loss of sensitive information via hacking. Decryption, the inverse of encryption, is the process of turning ciphertext into readable plaintext. Ciphertext is not to be confused with codetext, because the latter is a result of a code, not a cipher. == Conceptual underpinnings == Let m {\displaystyle m\!} be the plaintext message that Alice wants to secretly transmit to Bob and let E k {\displaystyle E_{k}\!} be the encryption cipher, where k {\displaystyle _{k}\!} is a cryptographic key. Alice must first transform the plaintext into ciphertext, c {\displaystyle c\!} , in order to securely send the message to Bob, as follows: c = E k ( m ) . {\displaystyle c=E_{k}(m).\!} In a symmetric-key system, Bob knows Alice's encryption key. Once the message is encrypted, Alice can safely transmit it to Bob (assuming no one else knows the key). In order to read Alice's message, Bob must decrypt the ciphertext using E k − 1 {\displaystyle {E_{k}}^{-1}\!} which is known as the decryption cipher, D k : {\displaystyle D_{k}:\!} D k ( c ) = D k ( E k ( m ) ) = m . {\displaystyle D_{k}(c)=D_{k}(E_{k}(m))=m.\!} Alternatively, in a non-symmetric key system, everyone, not just Alice and Bob, knows the encryption key; but the decryption key cannot be inferred from the encryption key. Only Bob knows the decryption key D k , {\displaystyle D_{k},} and decryption proceeds as D k ( c ) = m . {\displaystyle D_{k}(c)=m.} == Types of ciphers == The history of cryptography began thousands of years ago. Cryptography uses a variety of different types of encryption. Earlier algorithms were performed by hand and are substantially different from modern algorithms, which are generally executed by a machine. === Historical ciphers === Historical pen and paper ciphers used in the past are sometimes known as classical ciphers. They include: Substitution cipher: the units of plaintext are replaced with ciphertext (e.g., Caesar cipher and one-time pad) Polyalphabetic substitution cipher: a substitution cipher using multiple substitution alphabets (e.g., Vigenère cipher and Enigma machine) Polygraphic substitution cipher: the unit of substitution is a sequence of two or more letters rather than just one (e.g., Playfair cipher) Transposition cipher: the ciphertext is a permutation of the plaintext (e.g., rail fence cipher) Historical ciphers are not generally used as a standalone encryption technique because they are quite easy to crack. Many of the classical ciphers, with the exception of the one-time pad, can be cracked using brute force. === Modern ciphers === Modern ciphers are more secure than classical ciphers and are designed to withstand a wide range of attacks. An attacker should not be able to find the key used in a modern cipher, even if they know any specifics about the plaintext and its corresponding ciphertext. Modern encryption methods can be divided into the following categories: Private-key cryptography (symmetric key algorithm): one shared key is used for encryption and decryption Public-key cryptography (asymmetric key algorithm): two different keys are used for encryption and decryption In a symmetric key algorithm (e.g., DES, AES), the sender and receiver have a shared key established in advance: the sender uses the shared key to perform encryption; the receiver uses the shared key to perform decryption. Symmetric key algorithms can either be block ciphers or stream ciphers. Block ciphers operate on fixed-length groups of bits, called blocks, with an unvarying transformation. Stream ciphers encrypt plaintext digits one at a time on a continuous stream of data, with the transformation of successive digits varying during the encryption process. In an asymmetric key algorithm (e.g., RSA), there are two different keys: a public key and a private key. The public key is published, thereby allowing any sender to perform encryption. The private key is kept secret by the receiver, thereby allowing only the receiver to correctly perform decryption. == Cryptanalysis == Cryptanalysis (also referred to as codebreaking or cracking the code) is the study of applying various methodologies to obtain the meaning of encrypted information, without having access to the cipher required to correctly decrypt the information. This typically involves gaining an understanding of the system design and determining the cipher. Cryptanalysts can follow one or more attack models to crack a cipher, depending upon what information is available and the type of cipher being analyzed. Ciphertext is generally the most easily obtained part of a cryptosystem and therefore is an important part of cryptanalysis. === Attack models === Ciphertext-only: the cryptanalyst has access only to a collection of ciphertexts or code texts. This is the weakest attack model because the cryptanalyst has limited information. Modern ciphers rarely fail under this attack. Known-plaintext: the attacker has a set of ciphertexts to which they know the corresponding plaintext Chosen-plaintext attack: the attacker can obtain the ciphertexts corresponding to an arbitrary set of plaintexts of their own choosing Batch chosen-plaintext attack: where the cryptanalyst chooses all plaintexts before any of them are encrypted. This is often the meaning of an unqualified use of "chosen-plaintext attack". Adaptive chosen-plaintext attack: where the cryptanalyst makes a series of interactive queries, choosing subsequent plaintexts based on the information from the previous encryptions. Chosen-ciphertext attack: the attacker can obtain the plaintexts corresponding to an arbitrary set of ciphertexts of their own choosing Adaptive chosen-ciphertext attack Indifferent chosen-ciphertext attack Related-key attack: similar to a chosen-plaintext attack, except the attacker can obtain ciphertexts encrypted under two different keys. The keys are unknown, but the relationship between them is known (e.g., two keys that differ in the one bit). == Famous ciphertexts == The Babington Plot ciphers The Shugborough inscription The Zimmermann Telegram The Magic Words are Squeamish Ossifrage The cryptogram in "The Gold-Bug" Beale ciphers Kryptos Zodiac Killer ciphers

    Read more →
  • Feistel cipher

    Feistel cipher

    In cryptography, a Feistel cipher (also known as Luby–Rackoff block cipher) is a symmetric structure used in the construction of block ciphers, named after the German-born physicist and cryptographer Horst Feistel, who did pioneering research while working for IBM; it is also commonly known as a Feistel network. A large number of block ciphers use the scheme, including the US Data Encryption Standard, the Soviet/Russian GOST (aka Magma) and the more recent Blowfish and Twofish ciphers. In a Feistel cipher, encryption and decryption are very similar operations, and both consist of iteratively running a function called a "round function" a fixed number of times. == History == Many modern symmetric block ciphers are based on Feistel networks. Feistel networks were first seen commercially in IBM's Lucifer cipher, designed by Horst Feistel and Don Coppersmith in 1973. Feistel networks gained respectability when the U.S. Federal Government adopted the DES (a cipher based on Lucifer, with changes made by the NSA) in 1976. Like other components of the DES, the iterative nature of the Feistel construction makes implementing the cryptosystem in hardware easier (particularly on the hardware available at the time of DES's design). == Design == A Feistel network uses a round function, a function which takes two inputs – a data block and a subkey – and returns one output of the same size as the data block. In each round, the round function is run on half of the data to be encrypted, and its output is XORed with the other half of the data. This is repeated a fixed number of times, and the final output is the encrypted data. An important advantage of Feistel networks compared to other cipher designs such as substitution–permutation networks (SP-networks) is that the entire operation is guaranteed to be invertible (that is, encrypted data can be decrypted), even if the round function is not itself invertible. The round function can be made arbitrarily complicated, since it does not need to be designed to be invertible. Furthermore, the encryption and decryption operations are very similar, even identical in some cases, requiring only a reversal of the key schedule. Therefore, the size of the code or circuitry required to implement such a cipher is nearly halved. Unlike SP-networks, Feistel networks also do not depend on a substitution box that could cause timing side-channels in software implementations. == Theoretical work == The structure and properties of Feistel ciphers have been extensively analyzed by cryptographers. Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff analyzed the Feistel cipher construction and proved that if the round function is a cryptographically secure pseudorandom function, with Ki used as the seed, then 3 rounds are sufficient to make the block cipher a pseudorandom permutation, while 4 rounds are sufficient to make it a "strong" pseudorandom permutation (which means that it remains pseudorandom even to an adversary who gets oracle access to its inverse permutation). Because of this very important result of Luby and Rackoff, Feistel ciphers are sometimes called Luby–Rackoff block ciphers. Further theoretical work has generalized the construction somewhat and given more precise bounds for security. == Construction details == Let F {\displaystyle \mathrm {F} } be the round function and let K 0 , K 1 , … , K n {\displaystyle K_{0},K_{1},\ldots ,K_{n}} be the sub-keys for the rounds 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle 0,1,\ldots ,n} respectively. Then the basic operation is as follows: Split the plaintext block into two equal pieces: ( L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} , R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} ). For each round i = 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=0,1,\dots ,n} , compute L i + 1 = R i , {\displaystyle L_{i+1}=R_{i},} R i + 1 = L i ⊕ F ( R i , K i ) , {\displaystyle R_{i+1}=L_{i}\oplus \mathrm {F} (R_{i},K_{i}),} where ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } means XOR. Then the ciphertext is ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} . Decryption of a ciphertext ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} is accomplished by computing for i = n , n − 1 , … , 0 {\displaystyle i=n,n-1,\ldots ,0} R i = L i + 1 , {\displaystyle R_{i}=L_{i+1},} L i = R i + 1 ⊕ F ⁡ ( L i + 1 , K i ) . {\displaystyle L_{i}=R_{i+1}\oplus \operatorname {F} (L_{i+1},K_{i}).} Then ( L 0 , R 0 ) {\displaystyle (L_{0},R_{0})} is the plaintext again. The diagram illustrates both encryption and decryption. Note the reversal of the subkey order for decryption; this is the only difference between encryption and decryption. === Unbalanced Feistel cipher === Unbalanced Feistel ciphers use a modified structure where L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} and R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} are not of equal lengths. The Skipjack cipher is an example of such a cipher. The Texas Instruments digital signature transponder uses a proprietary unbalanced Feistel cipher to perform challenge–response authentication. The Thorp shuffle is an extreme case of an unbalanced Feistel cipher in which one side is a single bit. This has better provable security than a balanced Feistel cipher but requires more rounds. There exists Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 Feistel networks, where the Feistel function is one fourth the size of the block but operates a varying number of times within one round. === Other uses === The Feistel construction is also used in cryptographic algorithms other than block ciphers. For example, the optimal asymmetric encryption padding (OAEP) scheme uses a simple Feistel network to randomize ciphertexts in certain asymmetric-key encryption schemes. A generalized Feistel algorithm can be used to create strong permutations on small domains of size not a power of two (see format-preserving encryption). === Feistel networks as a design component === Whether the entire cipher is a Feistel cipher or not, Feistel-like networks can be used as a component of a cipher's design. For example, MISTY1 is a Feistel cipher using a three-round Feistel network in its round function, Skipjack is a modified Feistel cipher using a Feistel network in its G permutation, and Threefish (part of Skein) is a non-Feistel block cipher that uses a Feistel-like MIX function. == List of Feistel ciphers == Feistel or modified Feistel: Generalised Feistel: CAST-256 CLEFIA MacGuffin RC2 RC6 Skipjack SMS4

    Read more →