Microsoft Office PerformancePoint Server is a business intelligence software product released in 2007 by Microsoft. The product was generally an integration of the acquisitions from ProClarity - the Planning Server and Monitoring Server - into Microsoft's SharePoint server product line. Although discontinued in 2009, the dashboard, scorecard, and analytics capabilities of PerformancePoint Server were incorporated into SharePoint 2010 and later versions. PerformancePoint Server also provided a planning and budgeting component directly integrated with Excel. == History == Microsoft offered preview releases of PerformancePoint Server starting in mid-2006. Previews of the product were formed from Business Scorecard Manager 2005 and the Planning Server component. Acquisitions ProClarity and Great Plains brought additional analytics and planning/reporting capabilities, as well as companion products ProClarity 6.3 and FRx. PerformancePoint Server was officially released in November 2007. Microsoft discontinued PerformancePoint Server as an independent product in 2009 and folded its dashboard, scorecard and analytics capabilities into PerformancePoint Services in SharePoint Server 2010. == Monitoring Server Component == Business monitoring capabilities, including dashboards, scorecards & key performance indicators, navigable reports for deeper analysis, strategy maps, and linked filtering, are provided by PerformancePoint's Monitoring Server component. A Dashboard Designer application that is distributed from Monitoring Server enables business analysts or IT Administrators to: create & test data source connections create views that use those data connections assemble the views into a dashboard deploy the dashboard as a SharePoint page Dashboard Designer saved content and security information back to the Monitoring Server. Data source connections, such as OLAP cubes or relational tables, were also made through Monitoring Server. After a dashboard has been published to the Monitoring Server database, it would be deployed as a SharePoint page and shared with other users as such. When the pages were opened in a web browser, Monitoring Server updated the data in the views by connecting back to the original data sources. == Planning Server Component == PerformancePoint's Planning Server component supported maintenance of logical business models, budget & approval workflows, enterprise data sources, and it followed Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Planning Server made use of Excel for input and line-of-business reporting, as well as SQL Server for storing and processing business models. == Management Reporter Component == The Management Reporter component was designed to perform financial reporting and can read PerformancePoint Planning models directly. A development kit was also available to allow this component to read other models.
LanguageWare
LanguageWare is a natural language processing (NLP) technology developed by IBM, which allows applications to process natural language text. It comprises a set of Java libraries that provide a range of NLP functions: language identification, text segmentation/tokenization, normalization, entity and relationship extraction, and semantic analysis and disambiguation. The analysis engine uses a finite-state machine approach at multiple levels, which aids its performance characteristics while maintaining a reasonably small footprint. The behaviour of the system is driven by a set of configurable lexico-semantic resources which describe the characteristics and domain of the processed language. A default set of resources comes as part of LanguageWare and these describe the native language characteristics, such as morphology, and the basic vocabulary for the language. Supplemental resources have been created that capture additional vocabularies, terminologies, rules and grammars, which may be generic to the language or specific to one or more domains. A set of Eclipse-based customization tooling, LanguageWare Resource Workbench, is available on IBM's alphaWorks site, and allows domain knowledge to be compiled into these resources and thereby incorporated into the analysis process. LanguageWare can be deployed as a set of UIMA-compliant annotators, Eclipse plug-ins or Web Services.
Software token
A software token (a.k.a. soft token) is a piece of a two-factor authentication security device that may be used to authorize the use of computer services. Software tokens are stored on a general-purpose electronic device such as a desktop computer, laptop, PDA, or mobile phone and can be duplicated. (Contrast hardware tokens, where the credentials are stored on a dedicated hardware device and therefore cannot be duplicated — absent physical invasion of the device) Because software tokens are something one does not physically possess, they are exposed to unique threats based on duplication of the underlying cryptographic material - for example, computer viruses and software attacks. Both hardware and software tokens are vulnerable to bot-based man-in-the-middle attacks, or to simple phishing attacks in which the one-time password provided by the token is solicited, and then supplied to the genuine website in a timely manner. Software tokens do have benefits: there is no physical token to carry, they do not contain batteries that will run out, and they are cheaper than hardware tokens. == Security architecture == There are two primary architectures for software tokens: shared secret and public-key cryptography. For a shared secret, an administrator will typically generate a configuration file for each end-user. The file will contain a username, a personal identification number, and the secret. This configuration file is given to the user. The shared secret architecture is potentially vulnerable in a number of areas. The configuration file can be compromised if it is stolen and the token is copied. With time-based software tokens, it is possible to borrow an individual's PDA or laptop, set the clock forward, and generate codes that will be valid in the future. Any software token that uses shared secrets and stores the PIN alongside the shared secret in a software client can be stolen and subjected to offline attacks. Shared secret tokens can be difficult to distribute, since each token is essentially a different piece of software. Each user must receive a copy of the secret, which can create time constraints. Some newer software tokens rely on public-key cryptography, or asymmetric cryptography. This architecture eliminates some of the traditional weaknesses of software tokens, but does not affect their primary weakness (ability to duplicate). A PIN can be stored on a remote authentication server instead of with the token client, making a stolen software token no good unless the PIN is known as well. However, in the case of a virus infection, the cryptographic material can be duplicated and then the PIN can be captured (via keylogging or similar) the next time the user authenticates. If there are attempts made to guess the PIN, it can be detected and logged on the authentication server, which can disable the token. Using asymmetric cryptography also simplifies implementation, since the token client can generate its own key pair and exchange public keys with the server.
HKDF
HKDF is a multi-purpose key derivation function (KDF) based on the HMAC message authentication code. HKDF follows "extract-then-expand" paradigm, where the KDF logically consists of two modules: the first stage takes the input keying material and "extracts" from it a fixed-length pseudorandom key, and then the second stage "expands" this key into several additional, independent pseudorandom keys as the output of the KDF. == Mechanism == HKDF is the composition of two functions, HKDF-Extract and HKDF-Expand: HKDF(salt, IKM, info, length) = HKDF-Expand(HKDF-Extract(salt, IKM), info, length) === HKDF-Extract === HKDF-Extract (XTR) takes "input key material" or "source key material" (IKM or SKM) such as a shared secret generated using Diffie-Hellman; an optional, non-secret, random or pseudorandom salt (r); and generates a cryptographic key called the PRK ("pseudorandom key"). HKDF-Extract acts as a "randomness extractor", specifically a "computational extractor", taking a potentially non-uniform value of sufficient min-entropy and generating a value indistinguishable from a uniform random value (pseudorandom). Computational extractors assume attackers are computationally bounded and source entropy may only exist in a computational sense. Such extractors can be built using cryptographic functions under suitable assumptions, modeled as universal hash function (in the generic case) or a random oracle (in constrained scenarios like sources with weak entropy). Salt (r) acts as a "source-independent extractor", strengthening HKDF's security guarantees. Using a fixed public r is safe for multiple invocations of HKDF (on "independent" but secret IKMs which may or may not be derived from the same source), provided r isn't chosen or manipulated by an attacker. Ideally, r is a random string of hash function's output length. Even low quality r (weak entropy or shorter length) is recommended as they contribute "significantly" to the security of the OKM. Without or with a low-entropy, non-secret r, if an attacker can influence the IKMs source in a way that specifically exploits HKDF-Extract's underlying hash function (finding a collision or a specific bias), XTR provides no protection. A random r, even if fixed by the application (for example, random number generators using r as seed), would strengthen protections for that specific extractor session. In such a setting, sufficiently long IKMs also provide better entropy extraction. However, allowing the attacker to influence enough of the IKM after seeing r may result in a completely insecure KDF. HKDF-Extract is the result of HMAC with r as the key (all zeros up to length of the underlying extractor hash function, if not provided) and the IKM as the message. The underlying hash function used for HKDF-Extract step may be different to the one used by HKDF-Expand. It is recommended that HKDF-Extract uses strongest hash function available to the application, as it "concentrates" the entropy already present in IKM but may not necessarily "add" to it. Truncated output from a stronger underlying hash function for XTR (for example, SHA512/256) offers stronger extraction properties. The attacker is assumed to have partial knowledge about IKM (publicly known values in the case of Diffie-Hellman) or partial control over it (entropy pools). HKDF-Extract may be skipped if the IKM is itself a cryptographically strong key (and hence can assume the role of PRK), though it is recommended that HKDF-Extract be applied for the sake of compatibility with the general case, especially if r is available to the application. === HKDF-Expand === HKDF-Expand (PRF) takes the PRK (or any random key-derivation key if HKDF-Extract step is skipped), optional info (CTXinfo), and a length (L), to generate output key material (OKM) of length L. Multiple OKMs can be generated from a single PRK by using different values for CTXinfo, which must be "independent" of the IKM passed in HKDF-Extract. Even if an attacker, who knows r and some auxillary information about the secret IKM, can force the use of the same IKM (and PRK, by extension), in two or more HKDF-Expand contexts (represented by CTXinfo), the OKMs output are computationally independent (leak no useful information on each other). HKDF-Expand, acting as a variable-output-length pseudorandom function (PRF) keyed on PRK, calls HMAC on CTXinfo as the message (empty string, if unspecified) appended to a 8-bit counter i initialized to 1. Subsequent calls to HMAC are chained in "feedback mode" by prepending the previous HMAC output to CTXinfo and incrementing i. OKM is a function of the output size (k bits) of HMAC's underlying hash function; i.e., SHA-256 outputs OKM in segments of k=256 bits for up to a maximum of length i × k bits (255 × 256 bits = 8160 bytes) truncated to desired length L. HKDF-Expand may be skipped if PRK is at least desired length L, though it is recommended that HKDF-Expand be applied for additional "smoothing" of the OKM. == Standardization == HKDF was proposed as a building block in various protocols and applications, as well as to discourage the proliferation of multiple KDF mechanisms by its authors. It is formally described in RFC 5869 with detailed analysis in a paper published in 2010. NIST SP800-56Cr2 specifies a parameterizable extract-then-expand scheme, noting that RFC 5869 HKDF is a version of it and citing its paper for the rationale for the recommendations' extract-and-expand mechanisms. == Applications == HKDF is used in the Signal Protocol for end-to-end encrypted messaging where it generates the message keys, in conjunction with the triple Elliptic-curve Diffie-Hellman handshake (X3DH) key agreement protocol. Signal's "Secure Value Recovery" and "Sealed Sender" are based on HKDF. HKDF is a main component in the Noise Protocol Framework, Message Layer Security, and is used in widely deployed protocols like IPsec Internet Key Exchange and TLS 1.3. The "multi-purpose" nature of HKDF is meant to serve applications that require key extraction, key expansion, and key hierarchies in key wrapping, key exchange, PRNG, and password-based key derivation schemes. == Implementations == There are implementations of HKDF for C#, Go, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, and other programming languages. RFC6234 lays out a reference C implementation of HKDF based on the Secure Hash Standard. === Example in Python ===
Cryptographic Service Provider
A cryptographic service provider (CSP) is a package that "provides a concrete implementation of certain cryptographic services." A CSP offers operations and protocols to support a variety of use cases. The cryptographic application programming interface (API) provided by the CSP provides common solutions for different platforms, for example hardware and cloud services. == Microsoft Windows == In Microsoft Windows, a Cryptographic Service Provider is a software library that implements the Microsoft CryptoAPI (CAPI). CSPs implement encoding and decoding functions, which computer application programs may use, for example, to implement strong user authentication or for secure email. CSPs are independent modules that can be used by different applications. A user program calls CryptoAPI functions and these are redirected to CSPs functions. Since CSPs are responsible for implementing cryptographic algorithms and standards, applications do not need to be concerned about security details. Furthermore, each application can define which CSP it is going to use on its calls to CryptoAPI. In fact, all cryptographic activity is implemented in CSPs. CryptoAPI only works as a bridge between the application and the CSP. CSPs are implemented basically as a special type of DLL with special restrictions on loading and use. Every CSP must be digitally signed by Microsoft and the signature is verified when Windows loads the CSP. In addition, after being loaded, Windows periodically re-scans the CSP to detect tampering, either by malicious software such as computer viruses or by the user him/herself trying to circumvent restrictions (for example on cryptographic key length) that might be built into the CSP's code. To obtain a signature, non-Microsoft CSP developers must supply paperwork to Microsoft promising to obey various legal restrictions and giving valid contact information. As of circa 2000, Microsoft did not charge any fees to supply these signatures. For development and testing purposes, a CSP developer can configure Windows to recognize the developer's own signatures instead of Microsoft's, but this is a somewhat complex and obscure operation unsuitable for nontechnical end users. The CAPI/CSP architecture had its origins in the era of restrictive US government controls on the export of cryptography. Microsoft's default or "base" CSP then included with Windows was limited to 512-bit RSA public-key cryptography and 40-bit symmetric cryptography, the maximum key lengths permitted in exportable mass market software at the time. CSPs implementing stronger cryptography were available only to U.S. residents, unless the CSPs themselves had received U.S. government export approval. The system of requiring CSPs to be signed only on presentation of completed paperwork was intended to prevent the easy spread of unauthorized CSPs implemented by anonymous or foreign developers. As such, it was presented as a concession made by Microsoft to the government, in order to get export approval for the CAPI itself. After the Bernstein v. United States court decision establishing computer source code as protected free speech and the transfer of cryptographic regulatory authority from the U.S. State Department to the more pro-export Commerce Department, the restrictions on key lengths were dropped, and the CSPs shipped with Windows now include full-strength cryptography. The main use of third-party CSPs is to interface with external cryptography hardware such as hardware security modules (HSM) or smart cards. === Smart Card CSP === These cryptographic functions can be realized by a smart card, thus the Smart Card CSP is the Microsoft way of a PKCS#11. Microsoft Windows is identifying the correct Smart Card CSP, which have to be used, analyzing the answer to reset (ATR) of the smart card, which is registered in the Windows Registry. Installing a new CSP, all ATRs of the supported smart cards are enlisted in the registry. === Use of CSP in MS Office password protection === Cryptographic service providers can be used for encryption of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint documents starting from Microsoft Office XP. A standard encryption algorithm with a 40-bit key is used by default, but enabling a CSP enhances key length and thus makes decryption process more continuous. This only applies to passwords that are required to open document because this password type is the only one that encrypts a password-protected document.
Supertoroid
In geometry and computer graphics, a supertoroid or supertorus is usually understood to be a family of doughnut-like surfaces (technically, a topological torus) whose shape is defined by mathematical formulas similar to those that define the superellipsoids. The plural of "supertorus" is either supertori or supertoruses. The family was described and named by Alan Barr in 1994. Barr's supertoroids have been fairly popular in computer graphics as a convenient model for many objects, such as smooth frames for rectangular things. One quarter of a supertoroid can provide a smooth and seamless 90-degree joint between two superquadric cylinders. However, they are not algebraic surfaces (except in special cases). == Formulas == Alan Barr's supertoroids are defined by parametric equations similar to the trigonometric equations of the torus, except that the sine and cosine terms are raised to arbitrary powers. Namely, the generic point P(u, v) of the surface is given by P ( u , v ) = ( X ( u , v ) Y ( u , v ) Z ( u , v ) ) = ( ( a + C u s ) C v t ( b + C u s ) S v t S u s ) {\displaystyle P(u,v)=\left({\begin{array}{c}X(u,v)\\Y(u,v)\\Z(u,v)\end{array}}\right)=\left({\begin{array}{c}(a+C_{u}^{s})C_{v}^{t}\\(b+C_{u}^{s})S_{v}^{t}\\S_{u}^{s}\end{array}}\right)} where C θ ε = sgn ( cos θ ) | cos θ | ε , S θ ε = sgn ( sin θ ) | sin θ | ε , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}C_{\theta }^{\varepsilon }&=\operatorname {sgn} (\cos \theta )\,\left|\,\cos \theta \,\right|^{\varepsilon },\\S_{\theta }^{\varepsilon }&=\operatorname {sgn} (\sin \theta )\ \left|\,\sin \theta \ \right|^{\varepsilon },\end{aligned}}} sgn is the sign function, and the parameters u, v range from 0 to 360 degrees (0 to 2π radians). In these formulas, the parameter s > 0 controls the "squareness" of the vertical sections, t > 0 controls the squareness of the horizontal sections, and a, b ≥ 1 are the major radii in the x and y directions. With s = t = 1 and a = b = R one obtains the ordinary torus with major radius R and minor radius 1, with the center at the origin and rotational symmetry about the z-axis. In general, the supertorus defined as above spans the intervals: − ( a + 1 ) ≤ x ≤ + ( a + 1 ) − ( b + 1 ) ≤ y ≤ + ( b + 1 ) − 1 ≤ z ≤ + 1 {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}-(a+1)&\leq &x&\leq &+(a+1)\\[4pt]-(b+1)&\leq &y&\leq &+(b+1)\\[4pt]-1&\leq &z&\leq &+1\end{array}}} The whole shape is symmetric about the planes x = 0, y = 0, and z = 0. The hole runs in the z direction and spans the intervals − ( a − 1 ) ≤ x ≤ + ( a − 1 ) − ( b − 1 ) ≤ y ≤ + ( b − 1 ) − ∞ ≤ z ≤ + ∞ {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}-(a-1)&\leq &x&\leq &+(a-1)\\[4pt]-(b-1)&\leq &y&\leq &+(b-1)\\[4pt]-\infty &\leq &z&\leq &+\infty \end{array}}} A curve of constant u on this surface is a horizontal Lamé curve with exponent 2 t , {\displaystyle {\tfrac {2}{t}},} scaled in x and y and displaced in z. A curve of constant v, projected on the plane x = 0 or y = 0, is a Lamé curve with exponent 2 s , {\displaystyle {\tfrac {2}{s}},} scaled and horizontally shifted. If v = 0, the curve is planar and spans the intervals: a − 1 ≤ x ≤ a + 1 − 1 ≤ z ≤ + 1 {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}a-1&\leq &x&\leq &a+1\\[4pt]-1&\leq &z&\leq &+1\end{array}}} and similarly if v = 90°, 180°, 270°. The curve is also planar if a = b. In general, if a ≠ b and v is not a multiple of 90 degrees, the curve of constant v will not be planar; and, conversely, a vertical plane section of the supertorus will not be a Lamé curve. The basic supertoroid shape defined above is often modified by non-uniform scaling to yield supertoroids of specific width, length, and vertical thickness. == Plotting code == The following GNU Octave code generates plots of a supertorus:
Influencer
An influencer is an individual who has the capacity to shape the attitudes, behavior, or decisions of others through authority, knowledge, position, or the nature of the relationship with the audience. The term is used in various fields such as media, business, politics, religion, and communication, referring to influencers such as social media influencers, podcasters, public speakers, religious influencers, writers, and newsletter writers etc who have dedicated followings in various areas. One writer defines influencers as "a range of third parties who exercise influence over the organization and its potential customers." Another writer defines an influencer as a "third party who significantly shapes the customer's purchasing decision but may never be accountable for it." According to another writer, influencers are "well-connected, create an impact, have active minds, and are trendsetters". Just because a person has many followers does not necessarily mean they have much influence over those people. In contemporary usage, the term frequently refers to a social media influencer, (also known as an online influencer or simply influencer) a person who builds a grassroots online presence through engaging content such as photos, videos, and updates. This is done by using direct audience interaction to establish authenticity, expertise, and appeal, and by standing apart from traditional celebrities by growing their platform through social media rather than pre-existing fame. The modern referent of the term is commonly a paid role in which a business entity pays for the social media influence-for-hire activity to promote its products and services, known as influencer marketing. A 1% increase in spending on influencer marketing can lead to a 0.5% increase in audience engagement. As such, an influencer effectively acts as a modern salesperson or a marketer. Types of influencers include fashion influencer, travel influencer, and virtual influencer, and they involve content creators and streamers. Some influencers are associated primarily with specific social media apps such as TikTok, Instagram, or Pinterest; many influencers are also considered internet celebrities. As of 2023, Instagram is the social media platform businesses spend the most advertising money towards marketing with influencers. However, influencers can have an impact on any social media network. == History == === Origins === The word influencer in its general sense of a person or thing that exerts influence, is attested in historical sources at least since the 17th century. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) gives 1664 as the earliest example of usage and cites a sentence from Henry More's A Modest Enquiry into the Mystery of Iniquity: "The head and influencer of the whole Church". The origins of online influencing can be traced back to the emergence of digital blogs and platforms in the early 2000s. Nevertheless, recent studies demonstrate that Instagram, an application with more than one billion users, harbors the majority of the influencer demographic. These individuals are sometimes referred to as "Instagrammers" or "Instafamous". A crucial aspect of influencing is their association with sponsors. The 2015 debut of Vamp, a company that links influencers with sponsorships, transformed the landscape of influencing. There is much debate about whether social media influencers can be considered celebrities, as their path to fame is often less traditional and arguably easier. Melody Nouri addressed the differences between the two types in her article "The Power of Influence: Traditional Celebrities vs Social Media Influencer". Nouri asserts that social media platforms have a greater negative impact on young, impressionable audiences in comparison with traditional media such as magazines, billboards, advertisements, and tabloids featuring celebrities. Online, it is thought to be simpler to manipulate an image and lifestyle in such a way that viewers are more susceptible to believing it. One theory considers the former American First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) to be the "original media influencer." While she achieved celebrity in her role as First Lady, she built a global personal brand as a wise, informative, trustworthy American woman. Her voice was her own, unrestricted by political advisors and powerful men, and with it, Roosevelt exerted unprecedented social and cultural influence in radio, print, public speaking, film, and television until she died. In one notable example, it may have been Roosevelt's television support of John F. Kennedy which nudged his "hairline victory" during the 1960 Presidential campaign. In another example, David Ogilvy paid Roosevelt more than a quarter of a million dollars in today's currency to make a TV commercial for Good Luck margarine (1959), in which Roosevelt also managed to mention world hunger. As a content creator, she wrote My Day, a popular daily newspaper column that ran nationwide for twenty-six years. Like a social media post, My Day covered all aspects of her life, and in it Roosevelt often recommended movies, books, and products that she admired. Roosevelt also had a hand in designing all three of her public affairs television shows. Unlike contemporary influencers, she was less motivated by a pay-to-play situation than by a desire to educate and inspire; but she did use her influence to benefit the entertainment industry careers of her children, and she welcomed the revenue that her influence bought, most of which was donated to charity. === 2000s === The early 2000s showed corporate endeavors to leverage the internet for influence, with some companies participating in forums for promotions or providing bloggers with complimentary products in return for favorable reviews. A few of these practices were viewed as unethical for taking advantage of the labor of young individuals without providing remuneration. In 2004, The Blogstar Network was established by Ted Murphy of MindComet. Bloggers were encouraged to join an email list and receive remunerated offers from corporations in exchange for creating specific posts. For instance, bloggers were compensated for writing reviews of fast-food meals on their blogs. Blogstar is widely regarded as the first influencer marketing network. Murphy succeeded Blogstar with PayPerPost, which was introduced in 2006. This platform compensated significant posters on prominent forums and social media platforms for every post made about a corporate product. Payment rates were determined by the influencer's status. Though very popular, PayPerPost, received a great deal of criticism as these influencers were not required to disclose their involvement with PayPerPost as traditional journalism would have. With the success of PayPerPost, the public became aware that there was a drive for corporate interests to influence what some people were posting to these sites. The platform also incentivized other firms to establish comparable programs. Despite concerns, marketing networks with influencers continued to grow throughout the 2000s and into the 2010s. The influencer marketing industry was worth as much as $8 billion in 2019, according to estimates from Business Insider Intelligence, which are based on Mediakix data. Evan Asano, the Former CEO and founder of the agency Mediakix, previously spoke with Business Insider and said he believed influencer marketing on Instagram would continue to grow despite likes being hidden. === 2010s === By the 2010s, the term "influencer" described digital content creators with a large following, distinctive brand persona, and a patterned relationship with commercial sponsors. By this period, influencer marketing had become a widely researched field globally, with systematic reviews drawing on hundreds of studies that documented the growing role of authenticity, audience engagement, and parasocial relationships in shaping how consumers responded to influencer content across different markets. During this period, influencer culture also developed through distinct channels outside Western markets. In South Korea, the global spread of Korean pop culture, also called K-Pop, through platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter gave rise to what scholars have called 'Hallyu 2.0' or the 'New Korean Wave', where fans throughout Southeast Asia, North America, Latin America, and Europe shared, subtitled, and redistributed Korean music and film content on a large scale. This helped Korean entertainers to build substantial followings internationally. Consumers often mistakenly view celebrities as reliable, leading to trust and confidence in the products being promoted. A 2001 study from Rutgers University discovered that individuals were using "internet forums as influential sources of consumer information." The study proposes that consumers preferred internet forums and social media when making purchasing decisions over conventional advertising and print sources. An in