AI Analytics Certification

AI Analytics Certification — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Artificial intelligence in education

Artificial intelligence in education (often abbreviated as AIEd) is a subfield of educational technology that studies how to use artificial intelligence to create learning environments. Considerations in the field include data-driven decision-making, AI ethics, data privacy and AI literacy. Concerns include the potential for cheating, over-reliance, equity of access, reduced critical thinking, and the perpetuation of misinformation and bias. == History == Efforts to integrate AI into educational contexts have often followed technological advancement in the history of artificial intelligence. In the 1960s, educators and researchers began developing computer-based instruction systems, such as PLATO, developed by the University of Illinois. In the 1970s and 1980s, intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) were being adapted for classroom instruction. The International Artificial Intelligence in Education Society was founded in 1993. Coinciding with the AI boom of the 2020s, the use of large language models in the global north has been promoted and funded by venture capital and big tech. Companies creating AI services have targeted students and educational institutions as customers. Similarly, pre-AI boom educational companies have expanded their use of AI technologies. These commercial incentives for AIEd use may be related to a potential AI bubble. In the U.S., bipartisan support of AI development in K-12 education has been expressed, but specific implementations and best practices remain contentious. == Theory == AIEd applies theory from education studies, machine learning, and related fields. A 2019 review of the previous decade of studies found that most research prioritized technological design over pedagogical integration. Ouyang and Jiao (2021) propose three paradigms for AI in education, which follow roughly from least to most learner-centered and from requiring least to most technical complexity from the AI systems: AI-directed, learner-as-recipient: AIEd systems present a pre-set curriculum based on statistical patterns that do not adjust to learner's feedback. AI-supported, learner-as-collaborator: Systems that incorporate responsiveness to learner's feedback through, for example, natural language processing, wherein AI can support knowledge construction. AI-empowered, learner-as-leader: This model seeks to position AI as a supplement to human intelligence wherein learners take agency and AI provides consistent and actionable feedback. Some scholars place AI in education within a socio-technical framework. This positions AI alongside other emerging educational technologies, such as computing, the internet, and social media. The framework of Tsao, Heinrichs and Camit (2025) draws on new materialism and posthumanism, specifically Donna Haraway's concept of sympoiesis (making-with). This perspective views learning as an entanglement of human and non-human actors (students, teachers, and AI algorithms), where knowledge is co-composed in contact zones between human context and algorithmic prediction. AI agents have been trained on biased datasets, and thus continue to perpetuate societal biases. Since LLMs were created to produce human-like text, algorithmic bias can be introduced and reproduced. AI's data processing and monitoring reinforce neoliberal approaches to education rather than addressing inequalities. == Applications == Uses of generative AI chatbots in education have included assessment and feedback, machine translations, proof-reading exam question generation and copy editing, or as virtual assistants. Emotional AI in education is the study and development of systems that can detect learners' emotions or provide emotional support in learning. == Usage == === Schools and educators === Following the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, some schools and large school districts blocked access to the site and issued warnings that the use of such tools would be seen as cheating. Governmental and non-governmental organizations such as UNESCO, Article 4 of the European Union's AI Act, and the U.S. Department of Education have published reports advocating for specific AIEd approaches. National higher-education bodies have also published guidance on generative AI, including Ireland's Higher Education Authority, which issued a policy framework for higher education teaching and learning in December 2025. In 2024, UNESCO released updated global guidance for generative AI in education, emphasizing ethical use, teacher training, and data protection to ensure responsible integration of AI tools in learning environments. According to Taso (2025), policy implementation in higher education is interpreted and enacted differently by various organizations. These decentralized policies can lead to inconsistent enforcement and confusion among students regarding what constitutes acceptable use, with the burden of ethical navigation falling on individual teachers and students. AI integration in classrooms has created new forms of invisible labour for educators, who must navigate ambiguous policies, redesign assessments to be AI-resilient, and adjudicate potential academic integrity violations. The use of AI detection tools has also been criticised for creating an adversarial relationship between students and institutions, where students may be falsely accused of misconduct based on probabilistic software. AIEd advocates say that efforts should be made towards increasing global accessibility and training educators to serve underprivileged areas. === Students === Reliance on generative AI has been linked with reduced academic self-esteem and performance, and heightened learned helplessness. Algorithm errors and hallucinations are common flaws in AI agents, making them less trustworthy and reliable. According to a 2025 survey from Inside Higher Ed, 85% of higher education students use generative AI technology in some way, with 25% using AI to complete assignments for them. The most common reason cited for using AI to cheat was pressure to get high grades. 97% of students wanted some form of action from schools on the threat to academic integrity caused by AI, with the most popular options being clearer policies and more education about ethical uses of AI. In September 2025, The Atlantic published an op-ed from a high school senior arguing that the normalization of AI cheating was eroding critical thinking, academic integrity, creativity, and the shared student experience.
Read more →
Tumblr

Tumblr ( TUM-blər) is a microblogging and social media platform founded by David Karp in 2007 and operated by American company Tumblr, Inc., a subsidiary of Automattic. The service allows users to post multimedia and other content to a short-form blog. It has attracted significant attention and controversy for hosting a wide range of progressive user-generated content. == History == === Beginnings (2006–2012) === Development of Tumblr began in 2006 during a two-week gap between contracts at David Karp's software consulting company, Davidville. Karp had been interested in tumblelogs (short-form blogs, hence the name Tumblr) for some time and was waiting for one of the established blogging platforms to introduce their own tumblelogging platform. As none had done so after a year of waiting, Karp and developer Marco Arment began working on their own platform. Tumblr was launched in February 2007, and within two weeks had gained 75,000 users. Arment left the company in September 2010 to work on Instapaper. In June 2012, Tumblr featured its first major brand advertising campaign in collaboration with Adidas, who launched an official soccer Tumblr blog and bought ad placements on the user dashboard. This launch came only two months after Tumblr announced it would be moving towards paid advertising on its site. === Ownership by Yahoo! (2013–2018) === On May 20, 2013, it was announced that Yahoo and Tumblr had reached an agreement for Yahoo! Inc. to acquire Tumblr for $1.1 billion in cash. Many of Tumblr's users were unhappy with the news, causing some to start a petition, achieving nearly 170,000 signatures. David Karp remained CEO and the deal was finalized on June 20, 2013. Advertising sales goals were not met and in 2016 Yahoo wrote down $712 million of Tumblr's value. Verizon Communications acquired Yahoo in June 2017, and placed Yahoo and Tumblr under its Oath subsidiary. Karp announced in November 2017 that he would be leaving Tumblr by the end of the year. Jeff D'Onofrio, Tumblr's president and COO, took over leading the company. The site, along with the rest of the Oath division (renamed Verizon Media Group in 2019), continued to struggle under Verizon. In March 2019, Similarweb estimated Tumblr had lost 30% of its user traffic since December 2018, when the site had introduced a stricter content policy with heavier restrictions on adult content (which had been a notable draw to the service). In May 2019, it was reported that Verizon was considering selling the site due to its continued struggles since the purchase (as it had done with another Yahoo property, Flickr, via its sale to SmugMug). Following this news, Pornhub's vice president publicly expressed interest in purchasing Tumblr, with a promise to reinstate the previous adult content policies. === Automattic (2019–present) === On August 12, 2019, Verizon Media announced that it would sell Tumblr to Automattic, the operator of blog service WordPress.com and corporate backer of the open source blog software of the same name. The sale was for an undisclosed amount, but Axios reported that the sale price was less than $3 million, less than 0.3% of Yahoo's original purchase price. Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg stated that the site will operate as a complementary service to WordPress.com, and that there were no plans to reverse the content policy decisions made during Verizon ownership. In November 2022, Mullenweg stated that Tumblr will add support for the decentralized social networking protocol ActivityPub. In November 2023, most of Tumblr's product development and marketing teams were transferred to other groups within Automattic. Mullenweg stated that focus would shift to core functionality and streamlining existing features. In February 2024, Automattic announced that it would begin selling user data from Tumblr and WordPress.com to Midjourney and OpenAI. Tumblr users are opted-in by default, with an option to opt out. In August 2024, Automattic announced that it would migrate Tumblr's backend to an architecture derived from WordPress, in order to ease development and code sharing between the platforms. The company stated that this migration would not impact the service's user experience and content, and that users "won't even notice a difference from the outside". In January 2025, Mullenweg stated that the migration, once completed, would also "unlock" ActivityPub access for Tumblr, including native support for the company's official ActivityPub plugin for WordPress. In April 2025, Automattic announced layoffs for 16% of its workforce, reducing a large portion of Tumblr staff. On March 16, 2026, Tumblr implemented a change to how notes were assigned to reblogs, making it more similar to sites like Twitter and Bluesky. The change was rolled back the next day after heavy user backlash. == Features == === Blog management === Dashboard: The dashboard is the primary tool for the typical Tumblr user. It is a live feed of recent posts from blogs that they follow. Through the dashboard, users are able to comment, reblog, and like posts from other blogs that appear on their dashboard. The dashboard allows the user to upload text posts, images, videos, quotes, or links to their blog with a click of a button displayed at the top of the dashboard. Users are also able to connect their blogs to their Twitter and Facebook accounts, so that whenever they make a post, it will also be sent as a tweet and a status update. As of June 2022, users can also turn off reblogs on specific posts through the dashboard. Queue: Users are able to set up a schedule to delay posts that they make. They can spread their posts over several hours or even days. Tags: Users can help their audience find posts about certain topics by adding tags. If someone were to upload a picture to their blog and wanted their viewers to find pictures, they would add the tag #picture, and their viewers could use that word to search for posts with the tag #picture. HTML editing: Tumblr allows users to edit their blog's theme using HTML to control the appearance of their blog. Custom themes are able to be shared and used by other users, or sold. Custom domains: Tumblr allows users to use custom domains for their blogs. Users must purchase a domain from Tumblr Domains, an in-house registrar that provides domains that can only be used with Tumblr unless removed from the user's blog and transferred to another registrar. Blogs previously were able to be linked with any domain/subdomain from any registrar, however following the introduction of the Tumblr Domains service, now requires you to purchase a domain directly from Tumblr to be used with a blog. Users who kept their blogs connected to a domain after the introduction got to keep their custom domain, as long as they do not disconnect it from Tumblr or let the domain expire. === Tags === The tagging system on the website operates on a hybrid tagging system, involving both self-tagging (user write their own tags on their posts) and an auto-manual function (the website will recommend popular tags and ones that the user has used before.) Only the first 20 tags added to any post will be indexed by the site. The tags are prefaced by a hashtag and separated by commas, and spaces and special characters are allowed, but only up to 140 characters total per tag. There are two main types used by Tumblr users: descriptive tagging, and opinion or commentary tagging. Descriptive tags are usually introduced by the original poster, and describe what is in the post (e.g. #art, #sky). These are important for the original poster to use, so their post will be indexed and searchable by others wishing to view that subject of content. Tags used as a form of communication are unique to Tumblr, and are typically more personal, expressing opinions, reactions, meta-commentary, background information, and more. Instead of adding onto the reblogged post (with their comments becoming an addition to each subsequent reblog from them) a user may add their comments in the tags, not changing the content or appearance of the original post in any way. Not all users choose to use tags this way, but those who do use tags for commentary may prefer it over adding a comment on the actual post. === Mobile === With Tumblr's 2009 acquisition of Tumblerette, an iOS application created by Jeff Rock and Garrett Ross, the service launched its official iPhone app. The site became available to BlackBerry smartphones on April 17, 2010, via a Mobelux application in BlackBerry World. In June 2012, Tumblr released a new version of its iOS app, Tumblr 3.0, allowing support for Spotify integration, hi-res images and offline access. An app for Android is also available. A Windows Phone app was released on April 23, 2013. An app for Google Glass was released on May 16, 2013. === Inbox and messaging === Tumblr blogs have the option to allow users to submit questions, either as themselves or anonymously, to the blog for a response. Tumblr
Read more →
Verifiable secret sharing

In cryptography, a secret sharing scheme is verifiable if auxiliary information is included that allows players to verify their shares as consistent. More formally, verifiable secret sharing ensures that even if the dealer is malicious there is a well-defined secret that the players can later reconstruct. (In standard secret sharing, the dealer is assumed to be honest.) The concept of verifiable secret sharing (VSS) was first introduced in 1985 by Benny Chor, Shafi Goldwasser, Silvio Micali and Baruch Awerbuch. In a VSS protocol a distinguished player who wants to share the secret is referred to as the dealer. The protocol consists of two phases: a sharing phase and a reconstruction phase. Sharing: Initially the dealer holds secret as input and each player holds an independent random input. The sharing phase may consist of several rounds. At each round each player can privately send messages to other players and can also broadcast a message. Each message sent or broadcast by a player is determined by its input, its random input and messages received from other players in previous rounds. Reconstruction: In this phase each player provides its entire view from the sharing phase and a reconstruction function is applied and is taken as the protocol's output. An alternative definition given by Oded Goldreich defines VSS as a secure multi-party protocol for computing the randomized functionality corresponding to some (non-verifiable) secret sharing scheme. This definition is stronger than that of the other definitions and is very convenient to use in the context of general secure multi-party computation. Verifiable secret sharing is important for secure multiparty computation. Multiparty computation is typically accomplished by making secret shares of the inputs, and manipulating the shares to compute some function. To handle "active" adversaries (that is, adversaries that corrupt nodes and then make them deviate from the protocol), the secret sharing scheme needs to be verifiable to prevent the deviating nodes from throwing off the protocol. == Feldman's scheme == A commonly used example of a simple VSS scheme is the protocol by Paul Feldman, which is based on Shamir's secret sharing scheme combined with any encryption scheme which satisfies a specific homomorphic property (that is not necessarily satisfied by all homomorphic encryption schemes). The following description gives the general idea, but is not secure as written. (Note, in particular, that the published value gs leaks information about the dealer's secret s.) First, a cyclic group G of prime order q, along with a generator g of G, is chosen publicly as a system parameter. The group G must be chosen such that computing discrete logarithms is hard in this group. (Typically, one takes an order-q subgroup of (Z/pZ)×, where q is a prime dividing p − 1.) The dealer then computes (and keeps secret) a random polynomial P of degree t with coefficients in Zq, such that P(0) = s, where s is the secret. Each of the n share holders will receive a value P(1), ..., P(n) modulo q. Any t + 1 share holders can recover the secret s by using polynomial interpolation modulo q, but any set of at most t share holders cannot. (In fact, at this point any set of at most t share holders has no information about s.) So far, this is exactly Shamir's scheme. To make these shares verifiable, the dealer distributes commitments to the coefficients of P modulo q. If P(x) = s + a1x + ... + atxt, then the commitments that must be given are: c0 = gs, c1 = ga1, ... ct = gat. Once these are given, any party can verify their share. For instance, to verify that v = P(i) modulo q, party i can check that g v = c 0 c 1 i c 2 i 2 ⋯ c t i t = ∏ j = 0 t c j i j = ∏ j = 0 t g a j i j = g ∑ j = 0 t a j i j = g P ( i ) {\displaystyle g^{v}=c_{0}c_{1}^{i}c_{2}^{i^{2}}\cdots c_{t}^{i^{t}}=\prod _{j=0}^{t}c_{j}^{i^{j}}=\prod _{j=0}^{t}g^{a_{j}i^{j}}=g^{\sum _{j=0}^{t}a_{j}i^{j}}=g^{P(i)}} . This scheme is, at best, secure against computationally bounded adversaries, namely the intractability of computing discrete logarithms. Pedersen proposed later a scheme where no information about the secret is revealed even with a dealer with unlimited computing power. == Baghery's hash-based scheme == A recent line of research has proposed a unified framework, for building practical VSS schemes that do not necessarily require homomorphic commitments —a key requirement in traditional constructions such as Feldman's and Pedersen's schemes. The framework allows instantiations with different commitment schemes, including post-quantum secure options such as hash-based commitments. This offers a flexible and efficient approach to build VSS schemes, in which the verifiability of shares is decoupled from the need for homomorphic commitments, which are often tied to assumptions like the Discrete Logarithm (DL) problem, known to be insecure against quantum adversaries. One instantiation of the new framework uses hash-based commitments and a random oracle to construct a hash-based VSS scheme based on Shamir's secret sharing. === Protocol Overview === Sharing Phase: Given a secure hash-based commitment scheme C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} and a hash function H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} (modeled as a random oracle), to share a secret value s {\displaystyle s} among n {\displaystyle n} parties with threshold t {\displaystyle t} , the dealer acts as follows: Following Shamir sharing, the dealer samples a random degree- t {\displaystyle t} polynomial P ( X ) {\displaystyle P(X)} over a filed or ring, with P ( 0 ) = s {\displaystyle P(0)=s} . Each of the n {\displaystyle n} parties will receive a value v i = P ( i ) {\displaystyle v_{i}=P(i)} modulo q {\displaystyle q} as a share. To prove the validity of the shares, the dealer acts as follows: Samples another random degree- t {\displaystyle t} polynomial R ( X ) {\displaystyle R(X)} and n {\displaystyle n} random values γ 1 , … , γ n {\displaystyle \gamma _{1},\dots ,\gamma _{n}} from the same filed or ring. Computes a set of commitments c i = C ( P ( i ) , R ( i ) , γ i ) {\displaystyle c_{i}={\mathcal {C}}(P(i),R(i),\gamma _{i})} for i = 1 , 2 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,2,\dots ,n} . Note that, the additional randomness γ i {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}} is used when the secret s {\displaystyle s} does not have sufficient entropy, but it can be omitted when sharing a uniformly random secret. Each of the n {\displaystyle n} parties will also receive a value γ i {\displaystyle \gamma _{i}} modulo q {\displaystyle q} as a share. Calculates a challenge value d {\displaystyle d} via a hash function d = H ( c 1 , … , c n ) {\displaystyle d={\mathcal {H}}(c_{1},\dots ,c_{n})} and then computes a polynomial Z ( X ) = R ( X ) + d ⋅ P ( X ) {\displaystyle Z(X)=R(X)+d\cdot P(X)} . Broadcasts the commitments c 1 , … , c n {\displaystyle c_{1},\dots ,c_{n}} along with Z ( X ) {\displaystyle Z(X)} as the proof and privately sends ( v i , γ i ) {\displaystyle (v_{i},\gamma _{i})} as the individual share to party i {\displaystyle i} . Verification Phase: Given an individual share ( v i , γ i ) {\displaystyle (v_{i},\gamma _{i})} and a proof ( c 1 , … , c n , Z ( X ) ) {\displaystyle (c_{1},\dots ,c_{n},Z(X))} , party i {\displaystyle i} verifies the correctness of it as below: Checks that Z ( X ) {\displaystyle Z(X)} is a valid (up to) degree- t {\displaystyle t} polynomial. Recomputes the challenge value d = H ( c 1 , … , c n ) {\displaystyle d={\mathcal {H}}(c_{1},\dots ,c_{n})} , and verifies the commitment equation c i = C ( v i , Z ( i ) − d v i , γ i ) {\displaystyle c_{i}={\mathcal {C}}(v_{i},Z(i)-dv_{i},\gamma _{i})} . If the verification fails, similar to Feldman’s and Pedersen’s schemes, the party raises a complaint. If too many complaints (more than t {\displaystyle t} ) are raised, the dealer is disqualified. In case of a complaint, the dealer can publicly reveal the disputed share to allow global verification. Honest parties can then collectively agree to either continue or disqualify the dealer. This scheme supports the sharing of both low-entropy and high-entropy secrets. Moreover, since it relies solely on secure hash functions for commitments and on a (quantum) random oracle, it plausibly achieves security even against quantum adversaries. Additionally, by using only lightweight cryptographic primitives, the scheme is considerably more efficient in practice compared to traditional VSS constructions based on number-theoretic assumptions. == Benaloh's scheme == Once n shares are distributed to their holders, each holder should be able to verify that all shares are collectively t-consistent (i.e., any subset t of n shares will yield the same, correct, polynomial without exposing the secret). In Shamir's secret sharing scheme the shares s 1 , s 2 , . . . , s n {\displaystyle s_{1},s_{2},...,s_{n}} are t-consistent if and only if the interpolation of the points ( 1 , s 1 ) , ( 2 , s 2 ) , . . . , (
Read more →
Comparison of OLAP servers

The following tables compare general and technical information for a number of online analytical processing (OLAP) servers. Please see the individual products articles for further information. == General information == == Data storage modes == == APIs and query languages == APIs and query languages OLAP servers support. == OLAP distinctive features == A list of OLAP features that are not supported by all vendors. All vendors support features such as parent-child, multilevel hierarchy, drilldown. == System limits == == Security == == Operating systems == The OLAP servers can run on the following operating systems: Note (1):The server availability depends on Java Virtual Machine not on the operating system == Support information ==
Read more →
Suno (platform)

Suno is a generative artificial intelligence music creation platform. It is designed to generate music that can include vocals and instrumentation. The platform was initially developed by Suno, Inc., of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Suno has been widely available since December 20, 2023, after the launch of a web application and a partnership with Microsoft, which included Suno as a plugin in Microsoft Copilot. The program operates by producing songs based on text or audio prompts provided by its users. Suno does not disclose the dataset used to train its artificial intelligence. == History == Suno, Inc., was founded by four people: Michael Shulman, Georg Kucsko, Martin Camacho, and Keenan Freyberg. They all worked for Kensho, an AI startup, before starting their own company in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In April 2023, Suno released their open-source text-to-speech and audio model called "Bark" on GitHub. On March 21, 2024, Suno released its V3 version for all users. The new version allowed users to create a limited number of four-minute songs using a free account. Users can pay for more features. In April 2024, a sentimental ballad was generated with Suno based on the text of the MIT License. In June 2024, a lawsuit, led by the Recording Industry Association of America, was filed against Suno and Udio alleging widespread infringement of copyrighted sound recordings. The lawsuit sought to bar the companies from training on copyrighted music, as well as damages of up to $150,000 per work from infringements that have already taken place. On July 1, 2024, a mobile app for Suno was released. On November 19, 2024, Suno upgraded its AI song model program to v4. In January 2025, Michael Shulman remarked on a podcast, "I think the majority of people don't enjoy the majority of the time they spend making music." In March 2025, one day after thousands of musicians including Thom Yorke and ABBA's Björn Ulvaeus signed a letter calling for Suno to stop training its model on copyrighted music, Timbaland endorsed Suno in a video on the company's website. In July 2025, Suno user imoliver signed a record deal with Hallwood Media, which became the first instance of a traditional music label signing an AI-based creator. Hallwood later signed with AI-artist Xania Monet for US$3 million. Monet's songs were generated by Suno AI by poet Telisha Jones. In November 2025, Suno agreed to a $500 million dollar lawsuit settlement, in which Suno would be allowed to train its models on Warner Music Group's music catalog, and WMG would control aspects of AI likeness, music, audio, software, copyrights, AI tools and music created by users on Suno. As part of the settlement, Suno also acquired the concert discovery platform Songkick from WMG. == Controversy == Suno, Inc., has been sued by the Recording Industry Association of America for copyright infringement, and thousands of musicians have signed a letter demanding that the company cease using copyrighted music in their training data. Suno does not disclose the dataset used to train its artificial intelligence.
Read more →
Netsukuku

Netsukuku is an experimental peer-to-peer routing system, developed by the FreakNet MediaLab in 2005, created to build up a distributed network, anonymous and censorship-free, fully independent but not necessarily separated from the Internet, without the support of any server, Internet service provider and no central authority. Netsukuku is designed to handle up to 2128 nodes without any servers or central systems, with minimal CPU and memory resources. This mesh network can be built using existing network infrastructure components such as Wi-Fi. The project has been in slow development since 2005, never abandoning a beta state. It has also never been tested on large scale. == Operation == As of December 2011, the latest theoretical work on Netsukuku could be found in the author's master thesis Scalable Mesh Networks and the Address Space Balancing problem. The following description takes into account only the basic concepts of the theory. Netsukuku uses a custom routing protocol called QSPN (Quantum Shortest Path Netsukuku) that strives to be efficient and not taxing on the computational capabilities of each node. The current version of the protocol is QSPNv2. It adopts a hierarchical structure. 256 nodes are grouped inside a gnode (group node), 256 gnodes are grouped in a single ggnode (group of group nodes), 256 ggnodes are grouped in a single gggnode, and so on. This offers a set of advantages main documentation. The protocol relies on the fact that the nodes are not mobile and that the network structure does not change quickly, as several minutes may be required before a change in the network is propagated. However, a node that joins the network is immediately able to communicate using the routes of its neighbors. When a node joins the mesh network, Netsukuku automatically adapts and all other nodes come to know the fastest and most efficient routes to communicate with the newcomer. Each node has no more privileges or restrictions than the other nodes. The domain name system (DNS) is replaced by a decentralised and distributed system called ANDNA (Abnormal Netsukuku Domain Name Anarchy). The ANDNA database is included in the Netsukuku system, so each node includes such database that occupies at most 355 kilobytes of memory. Simplifying, ANDNA works as follows: to resolve a symbolic name the host applies a function Hash on its behalf. The Hash function returns an address that the host contacts asking for the resolution generated by the hash. The contacted node receives a request, searches in its ANDNA database for the address associated with the name and returns it to the applicant host. Recording works in a similar way: for example, let's suppose that the node X wants to register the address FreakNet.andna; X calculates the hash name and obtains the address 11.22.33.44 associated with node Y. The node X contacts Y asking to register 11.22.33.44 as its own. Y stores the request in its database and any request for resolution of 11.22.33.44 hash, will answer with the X's address. The protocol is a little more complex than this, as the system provides a public/private key to authenticate the hosts and prevent unauthorized changes to the ANDNA database. Furthermore, the protocol provides redundancy in the database to make the protocol resistant to failure and also provides for the migration of the database if the network topology changes. The protocol does not provide for the possibility of revoking a symbolic name; after a certain period of inactivity (currently 3 days) it is simply deleted from the database. The protocol also prevents a single host from recording an excessive number of symbolic names (at present 256 names) in order to prevent spammers from storing a high number of terms to perform cybersquatting.
Read more →
Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory

Cryptographic Module Testing Laboratory (CMTL) is an information technology (IT) computer security testing laboratory that is accredited to conduct cryptographic module evaluations for conformance to the FIPS 140-2 U.S. Government standard. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) accredits CMTLs to meet Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP) standards and procedures. This has been replaced by FIPS 140-2 and the Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP). == CMTL requirements == These laboratories must meet the following requirements: NIST Handbook 150, NVLAP Procedures and General Requirements NIST Handbook 150-17 Information Technology Security Testing - Cryptographic Module Testing NVLAP Specific Operations Checklist for Cryptographic Module Testing == FIPS 140-2 in relation to the Common Criteria == A CMTL can also be a Common Criteria (CC) Testing Laboratory (CCTL). The CC and FIPS 140-2 are different in the abstractness and focus of evaluation. FIPS 140-2 testing is against a defined cryptographic module and provides a suite of conformance tests to four FIPS 140 security levels. FIPS 140-2 describes the requirements for cryptographic modules and includes such areas as physical security, key management, self tests, roles and services, etc. The standard was initially developed in 1994 - prior to the development of the CC. The CC is an evaluation against a Protection Profile (PP), or security target (ST). Typically, a PP covers a broad range of products. A CC evaluation does not supersede or replace a validation to either FIPS 140-1, FIPS140-2 or FIPS 140-3. The four security levels in FIPS 140-1 and FIPS 140-2 do not map directly to specific CC EALs or to CC functional requirements. A CC certificate cannot be a substitute for a FIPS 140-1 or FIPS 140-2 certificate. If the operational environment is a modifiable operational environment, the operating system requirements of the Common Criteria are applicable at FIPS Security Levels 2 and above. FIPS 140-1 required evaluated operating systems that referenced the Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC) classes C2, B1 and B2. However, TCSEC is no longer in use and has been replaced by the Common Criteria. Consequently, FIPS 140-2 now references the Common Criteria. FIPS 140-2 or FIPS 140-3 validation efforts can be in some parts reused in Common Criteria evaluations, specifically in areas related to entropy source and cryptographic algorithms.
Read more →
Human rights and encryption

Human rights and encryption refers to the ways in which digital encryption affects human rights. Encryption can be used as both a detriment and a boon to human rights; for example, encryption can be used to enforce digital rights management for video games. This kind of video game licensing can render software unusable long term and represents the erosion of consumer rights. At the same time, encryption is fundamental part of internet security. Asymmetrical encryption is used extensively online for authentication, providing users confidence their internet traffic is not being misdirected. Encryption is also used to obfuscate information as it travels from end-to-end over the internet, preventing eavesdropping and tampering. Encryption can also provide anonymity, which is an important consideration for freedom of expression. Despite its drawbacks, encryption is essential for a free, open, and trustworthy internet. == Background == === Human rights === Human rights are moral principles or norms for human behaviour that are regularly protected as legal rights in national and international law. They are commonly understood as inalienable, fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because they are a human being". Those rights are "inherent in all human beings" regardless of their nationality, location, language, religion, ethnic origin, or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time and are universal and egalitarian. === Cryptography === Cryptography is a long-standing subfield of both mathematics and computer science. It can generally be defined as "the protection of information and computation using mathematical techniques." Encryption and cryptography are closely interlinked, although "cryptography" has a broader meaning. For example, a digital signature is "cryptography", but not technically "encryption". == Overview == Under international human rights law, freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In Article 19 of the UDHR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Since the 1970s, the availability of digital computing and the invention of public-key cryptography have made encryption more widely available. (Previously, encryption techniques were the domain of nation-state actors.) Cryptographic techniques are also used to protect the anonymity of communicating actors and privacy more generally. The availability and use of encryption continue to lead to complex, important, and highly contentious legal policy debates. Some government agencies have made statements or proposals to lessen such usage and deployment due to hurdles it presents for government access. The rise of commercial end-to-end encryption services have pushed towards more debates around the use of encryption and the legal status of cryptography in general. Encryption, as defined above, is a set of cryptographic techniques to protect information. The normative value of encryption, however, is not fixed but varies with the type and purpose of the cryptographic methods used. Traditionally, encryption (cipher) techniques were used to ensure the confidentiality of communications and prevent access to information and communications by others and intended recipients. Cryptography can also ensure the authenticity of communicating parties and the integrity of communications contents, providing a key ingredient for enabling trust in the digital environment. There is a growing awareness within human rights organizations that encryption plays an important role in realizing a free, open, and trustworthy Internet. UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression David Kaye observed, during the Human Rights Council in June 2015, that encryption and anonymity deserve a protected status under the rights to privacy and freedom of expression: "Encryption and anonymity, today's leading vehicles for online security, provide individuals with a means to protect their privacy, empowering them to browse, read, develop and share opinions and information without interference and enabling journalists, civil society organizations, members of ethnic or religious groups, those persecuted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, activists, scholars, artists and others to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression." == Encryption in media and communication == In the context of media and communication, two types of encryption in media and communication can be distinguished: It could be used as a result of the choice of a service provider or deployed by Internet users. Client-side encryption tools and technologies are relevant for marginalized communities, journalists and other online media actors practicing journalism as a way of protecting their rights. It could prevent unauthorized third party access, but the service provider implementing it would still have access to the relevant user data. End-to-end encryption is an encryption technique that refers to encryption that also prevents service providers themselves from having access to the user's communications. The implementation of these forms of encryption has sparked the most debate since the start of the 21st century. === Service providers deployed techniques to prevent unauthorized third-party access. === Among the most widely deployed cryptographic techniques is the securitization of communications channel between internet users and specific service providers from man-in-the-middle attacks, access by unauthorized third parties. Given the breadth of nuances involved, these cryptographic techniques must be run jointly by both the service user and the service provider in order to work properly. They require service providers, including online news publisher(s) or social network(s), to actively implement them into service design. Users cannot deploy these techniques unilaterally; their deployment is contingent on active participation by the service provider. The TLS protocol, which becomes visible to the normal internet user through the HTTPS header, is widely used for securing online commerce, e-government services and health applications as well as devices that make up networked infrastructures, e.g., routers, cameras. However, although the standard has been around since 1990, the wider spread and evolution of the technology has been slow. As with other cryptographic methods and protocols, the practical challenges related to proper, secure and (wider) deployment are significant and have to be considered. Many service providers still do not implement TLS or do not implement it well. In the context of wireless communications, the use of cryptographic techniques that protect communications from third parties are also important. Different standards have been developed to protect wireless communications: 2G, 3G and 4G standards for communication between mobile phones, base stations and base stations controllers; standards to protect communications between mobile devices and wireless routers ('WLAN'); and standards for local computer networks. One common weakness in these designs is that the transmission points of the wireless communication can access all communications e.g., the telecommunications provider. This vulnerability is exacerbated when wireless protocols only authenticate user devices, but not the wireless access point. Whether the data is stored on a device, or on a local server as in the cloud, there is also a distinction between 'at rest'. Given the vulnerability of cellphones to theft for instance, particular attention may be given to limiting service provided access. This does not exclude the situation that the service provider discloses this information to third parties like other commercial entities or governments. The user needs to trust the service provider to act in their interests. The possibility that a service provider is legally compelled to hand over user information or to interfere with particular communications with particular users, remains. === Privacy-enhancing Technologies === There are services that specifically market themselves with claims not to have access to the content of their users' communication. Service Providers can also take measures that restrict their ability to access information and communication, further increasing the protection of users against access to their information and communications. The integrity of these Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs), depends on delicate design decisions as well as the
Read more →
FreshBooks

FreshBooks is accounting software operated by 2ndSite Inc. primarily for small and medium-sized businesses. It is a web-based software as a service (SaaS) model, that can be accessed through a desktop or mobile device. The company was founded in 2003 and is based in Toronto, Canada. == History == FreshBooks was founded in 2004 by Mike McDerment, Levi Cooperman, and Joe Sawada in Toronto, Ontario. McDerment incorporated a second company, BillSpring in January 2015 to work on new product development. It was rolled back into FreshBooks as an updated interface in 2016. Initially FreshBooks functioned like an electronic invoicing program targeting IT professionals. After the release of the new interface, the initial release of FreshBooks was referred to as "FreshBooks Classic." FreshBooks Classic was discontinued in 2022 after migrating users to the new platform. FreshBooks Classic's front-end application was built in PHP, and the backend services were built in Python while the new FreshBooks uses the same backend services with a JavaScript single-page application. == Product == FreshBooks is a subscription-based accounting software platform that provides features such as invoicing, accounts payable, expense and time tracking, retainers, fixed asset depreciation, purchase orders, payroll integrations, mileage tracking, double-entry accounting, and standard business reporting. Financial data is stored in the cloud on a unified ledger, enabling access from desktop and mobile devices. The platform includes a free API for integration with external applications and supports multiple tax rates and currencies. It also offers project management and payroll functionalities. Pricing is based on a recurring monthly fee. FreshBooks supports country-specific tax calculations, including GST and HST in Canada, sales taxes in the United States, and MTD compliance in the UK. == Operations == FreshBooks has its headquarters in Toronto, Canada with operations in North America, Europe and Australia. Founder Mike McDerment was the chief executive officer of the company from 2003 until 2021, when he stepped down and was replaced by Don Epperson, but stayed as the executive chair. Don Epperson had previously joined FreshBooks as executive director in 2019. == Funding == FreshBooks was initially self-funded. In 2014, the company raised a Series A venture investment of $30 million led by the venture capital firm Oak Investment Partners, with participation by Georgian Partners and Atlas Venture. In 2017, FreshBooks announced that it raised another $43 million in funding from Accomplice, Georgian Partners and Oak Investment Partners. On August 10, 2021, FreshBooks announced that it had secured $80.75 million in Series E funding and $50 million in debt financing. FreshBooks also reached a valuation of more than $1 billion.
Read more →
Plaintext

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

In cryptography, a cryptosystem is a suite of cryptographic algorithms needed to implement a particular security service, such as confidentiality (encryption). Typically, a cryptosystem consists of three algorithms: one for key generation, one for encryption, and one for decryption. The term cipher (sometimes cypher) is often used to refer to a pair of algorithms, one for encryption and one for decryption. Therefore, the term cryptosystem is most often used when the key generation algorithm is important. For this reason, the term cryptosystem is commonly used to refer to public key techniques; however both "cipher" and "cryptosystem" are used for symmetric key techniques. == Formal definition == Mathematically, a cryptosystem or encryption scheme can be defined as a tuple ( P , C , K , E , D ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {P}},{\mathcal {C}},{\mathcal {K}},{\mathcal {E}},{\mathcal {D}})} with the following properties. P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} is a set called the "plaintext space". Its elements are called plaintexts. C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} is a set called the "ciphertext space". Its elements are called ciphertexts. K {\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}} is a set called the "key space". Its elements are called keys. E = { E k : k ∈ K } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}=\{E_{k}:k\in {\mathcal {K}}\}} is a set of functions E k : P → C {\displaystyle E_{k}:{\mathcal {P}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {C}}} . Its elements are called "encryption functions". D = { D k : k ∈ K } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}=\{D_{k}:k\in {\mathcal {K}}\}} is a set of functions D k : C → P {\displaystyle D_{k}:{\mathcal {C}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {P}}} . Its elements are called "decryption functions". For each e ∈ K {\displaystyle e\in {\mathcal {K}}} , there is d ∈ K {\displaystyle d\in {\mathcal {K}}} such that D d ( E e ( p ) ) = p {\displaystyle D_{d}(E_{e}(p))=p} for all p ∈ P {\displaystyle p\in {\mathcal {P}}} . Note; typically this definition is modified in order to distinguish an encryption scheme as being either a symmetric-key or public-key type of cryptosystem. == Examples == A classical example of a cryptosystem is the Caesar cipher. A more contemporary example is the RSA cryptosystem. Another example of a cryptosystem is the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). AES is a widely used symmetric encryption algorithm that has become the standard for securing data in various applications. Paillier cryptosystem is another example used to preserve and maintain privacy and sensitive information. It is featured in electronic voting, electronic lotteries and electronic auctions.
Read more →
Convergent encryption

Convergent encryption, also known as content hash keying, is a cryptosystem that produces identical ciphertext from identical plaintext files. This has applications in cloud computing to remove duplicate files from storage without the provider having access to the encryption keys. The combination of deduplication and convergent encryption was described in a backup system patent filed by Stac Electronics in 1995. This combination has been used by Farsite, Permabit, Freenet, MojoNation, GNUnet, flud, and the Tahoe Least-Authority File Store. The system gained additional visibility in 2011 when cloud storage provider Bitcasa announced they were using convergent encryption to enable de-duplication of data in their cloud storage service. == Overview == The system computes a cryptographic hash of the plaintext in question. The system then encrypts the plaintext by using the hash as a key. Finally, the hash itself is stored, encrypted with a key chosen by the user. == Known Attacks == Convergent encryption is open to a "confirmation of a file attack" in which an attacker can effectively confirm whether a target possesses a certain file by encrypting an unencrypted, or plain-text, version and then simply comparing the output with files possessed by the target. This attack poses a problem for a user storing information that is non-unique, i.e. also either publicly available or already held by the adversary - for example: banned books or files that cause copyright infringement. An argument could be made that a confirmation of a file attack is rendered less effective by adding a unique piece of data such as a few random characters to the plain text before encryption; this causes the uploaded file to be unique and therefore results in a unique encrypted file. However, some implementations of convergent encryption where the plain-text is broken down into blocks based on file content, and each block then independently convergently encrypted may inadvertently defeat attempts at making the file unique by adding bytes at the beginning or end. Even more alarming than the confirmation attack is the "learn the remaining information attack" described by Drew Perttula in 2008. This type of attack applies to the encryption of files that are only slight variations of a public document. For example, if the defender encrypts a bank form including a ten digit bank account number, an attacker that is aware of generic bank form format may extract defender's bank account number by producing bank forms for all possible bank account numbers, encrypt them and then by comparing those encryptions with defender's encrypted file deduce the bank account number. Note that this attack can be extended to attack a large number of targets at once (all spelling variations of a target bank customer in the example above, or even all potential bank customers), and the presence of this problem extends to any type of form document: tax returns, financial documents, healthcare forms, employment forms, etc. Also note that there is no known method for decreasing the severity of this attack -- adding a few random bytes to files as they are stored does not help, since those bytes can likewise be attacked with the "learn the remaining information" approach. The only effective approach to mitigating this attack is to encrypt the contents of files with a non-convergent secret before storing (negating any benefit from convergent encryption), or to simply not use convergent encryption in the first place.
Read more →
Space-based data center

Space-based data centers or orbital AI infrastructure are proposed concepts to build AI data centers in the sun-synchronous orbit or other orbits utilizing space-based solar power. Electric power has become the main bottleneck for terrestrial AI infrastructure. Space-based edge computing has historical roots in military architectures designed to bypass the latency of ground-based targeting networks. In the 1980s, the Strategic Defense Initiative's Brilliant Pebbles program first envisioned autonomous on-orbit data processing for missile defense. In 2019, the Space Development Agency (SDA) began to revive this decentralized approach through its Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture (PWSA). This ambitious "sensor-to-shooter" infrastructure is treated as a prerequisite for the modern Golden Dome program, which would rely on space-based data processing to continuously track targets. == History == Early thinking about space-based computing infrastructure grew out of mid-20th-century visions for large orbital industrial systems, most notably proposals for space-based solar power, which were popularized in both technical literature and science writing by figures such as Isaac Asimov in the 1940s. These ideas emphasized exploiting the vacuum, continuous solar energy, and thermal characteristics of space to support power-intensive activities that would be difficult or inefficient on Earth. In the 21st century, advances in small satellites, reusable launch vehicles, and high-performance computing revived interest in space-based data centers, with governments and private companies exploring orbital or near-space platforms for edge computing, secure data handling, and low-latency processing of Earth-observation data. In September 2024, Y Combinator-backed Starcloud released a white paper detailing plans to build multiple gigawatts of AI compute in orbit. It was the first widely cited proposal to actually start building large orbital data centers. In 2025, Starcloud deployed an NVIDIA H100-class system and became the first company to train an LLM in space and run a version of Google Gemini in space. In March 2025, Lonestar deployed a data backup machine on the surface of the moon. In early January 2026, a team from the University of Pennsylvania presented a tether-based architecture for orbital data centers at the AIAA SciTech conference. The design relied on gravity gradient tension and solar-pressure-based passive attitude stabilization to minimize the mass of MW-scale orbital data centers. In January 2026, SpaceX filed plans with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for millions of satellites, leveraging reusable launches and Starlink integration to extend cloud and AI computing into orbit. Around the same time, Blue Origin announced the TeraWave constellation of about 5,400 satellites, designed to provide high‑throughput networking for data centers, enterprise, and government customers. Meanwhile, China announced a 200,000‑satellite constellation, focusing on state coordination, data sovereignty, and in-orbit processing for secure, time-critical applications. In February 2026, Starcloud submitted a proposal to the FCC for a constellation of up to 88,000 satellites for orbital data centers. In March, it announced intentions to be the first to mine Bitcoin in space, flying bitcoin mining ASICs on its second satellite, Starcloud-2. In May 2026, Edge Aerospace was awarded a contract by the European Space Agency under its Space Cloud program to study use cases, architectures and implementation roadmap for orbital data centers. == Feasibility == In October 2025, Nature Electronics published a study led by a research group at Nanyang Technological University on the development of carbon-neutral data centres in space. In November 2025, Google published a feasibility study on space-based data centers. The authors argued that if launch costs to low earth orbit reached US$200/kg, the launch cost for data center satellites could be cost effective relative to current energy costs for ground-based data centers. They project this may occur around 2035 if SpaceX's Starship project scales to 180 launches/year by then. == Advantages == Some sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) planes have constant sunlight in the dawn/dusk which could provide continuous solar energy. SSO is a limited resource and proper management and sharing of it is required. Solar irradiance is 36% higher in Earth orbit than on the surface No Earth weather storms or clouds, however more exposed to Solar storms. No property tax or land-use regulation. Saves space for other land use. Ample space for scalability. Won't strain the power grid. Direct access to power source without additional infrastructure. == Disadvantages == The deployment of space-based data centers raises several technical, economic, and environmental concerns. Existing launch costs are substantial and remains main cost of space infrastructure deployment Cooling is limited to heat dissipation through radiation only, which made in inefficient in comparison to convection in terrestrial data centers Space infrastructure must be designed to survive launch and to work under environment conditions of radiation, wide range of temperatures, in vacuum and in microgravity In-space assembly is on early development stage to enable deployment of mega-structures Megastructures are particularly exposed to orbital debris Solar arrays efficiency decrease 0.5% to 0.8% per year due to exposure of ultraviolet rays, space weather and orbital thermal cycles Hardware is designed for limited lifespan. Maintenance and repair in space (known as On-Orbit Servicing (OOS)) is still on early stage of practical implementation. Disposable data centre: technology obsolescence of AI data centre being a concern and difficult maintenance in space imply the single-use purpose of those space data centres. To extend lifetime, space infrastructure will require either refueling or orbit rasie by the servicer, which is going to increase its operational costs The environmental impact on Earth has its own challenges: The environmental impact of launches need to be addressed. Deployment consumes Earth resources that cannot be recovered or recycled. Computers require lots of resources, some of which are strategic. Recycling e-waste is already a challenge on Earth and extremely unlikely in space. Space debris (orbit pollution) is another sustainability challenge for space: Orbits are, like any resources, a limited physical and electromagnetic resource and available for all mankind. The accumulation of satellites on a particular orbit reduces the use of space for other purposes. A consequence of the increase of satellite in orbit is a higher risk of the runaway of space debris (see Kessler syndrome). This means some orbits could become unusable. Latency and bandwidth are constrained in space, and consumes limited electromagnetic resources. Satellite flares could inhibit ground-based and space-based observational astronomy. == Size and power generated == It would take ~1 square mile solar array in earth orbit to produce 1 gigawatt of power at 30% cell efficiency. == Companies pursuing space-based AI infrastructure == Blue Origin Cowboy Space Corporation (formerly Aetherflux) Edge Aerospace Google – Project Suncatcher Nvidia OpenAI SpaceX Starcloud
Read more →
Tableau de Concordance

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

Tokenization, when applied to data security, is the process of substituting a sensitive data element with a non-sensitive equivalent, referred to as a token, that has no intrinsic or exploitable meaning or value. The token is a reference (i.e. identifier) that maps back to the sensitive data through a tokenization system. The mapping from original data to a token uses methods that render tokens infeasible to reverse in the absence of the tokenization system, for example using tokens created from random numbers. A one-way cryptographic function is used to convert the original data into tokens, making it difficult to recreate the original data without obtaining entry to the tokenization system's resources. To deliver such services, the system maintains a vault database of tokens that are connected to the corresponding sensitive data. Protecting the system vault is vital to the system, and improved processes must be put in place to offer database integrity and physical security. The tokenization system must be secured and validated using security best practices applicable to sensitive data protection, secure storage, audit, authentication and authorization. The tokenization system provides data processing applications with the authority and interfaces to request tokens, or detokenize back to sensitive data. The security and risk reduction benefits of tokenization require that the tokenization system is logically isolated and segmented from data processing systems and applications that previously processed or stored sensitive data replaced by tokens. Only the tokenization system can tokenize data to create tokens, or detokenize back to redeem sensitive data under strict security controls. The token generation method must be proven to have the property that there is no feasible means through direct attack, cryptanalysis, side channel analysis, token mapping table exposure or brute force techniques to reverse tokens back to live data. Replacing live data with tokens in systems is intended to minimize exposure of sensitive data to those applications, stores, people and processes, reducing risk of compromise or accidental exposure and unauthorized access to sensitive data. Applications can operate using tokens instead of live data, with the exception of a small number of trusted applications explicitly permitted to detokenize when strictly necessary for an approved business purpose. Tokenization systems may be operated in-house within a secure isolated segment of the data center, or as a service from a secure service provider. Tokenization may be used to safeguard sensitive data involving, for example, bank accounts, financial statements, medical records, criminal records, driver's licenses, loan applications, stock trades, voter registrations, and other types of personally identifiable information (PII). Tokenization is often used in credit card processing. The PCI Council defines tokenization as "a process by which the primary account number (PAN) is replaced with a surrogate value called a token. A PAN may be linked to a reference number through the tokenization process. In this case, the merchant simply has to retain the token and a reliable third party controls the relationship and holds the PAN. The token may be created independently of the PAN, or the PAN can be used as part of the data input to the tokenization technique. The communication between the merchant and the third-party supplier must be secure to prevent an attacker from intercepting to gain the PAN and the token. De-tokenization is the reverse process of redeeming a token for its associated PAN value. The security of an individual token relies predominantly on the infeasibility of determining the original PAN knowing only the surrogate value". The choice of tokenization as an alternative to other techniques such as encryption will depend on varying regulatory requirements, interpretation, and acceptance by respective auditing or assessment entities. This is in addition to any technical, architectural or operational constraint that tokenization imposes in practical use. == Concepts and origins == The concept of tokenization, as adopted by the industry today, has existed since the first currency systems emerged centuries ago as a means to reduce risk in handling high value financial instruments by replacing them with surrogate equivalents. In the physical world, coin tokens have a long history of use replacing the financial instrument of minted coins and banknotes. In more recent history, subway tokens and casino chips found adoption for their respective systems to replace physical currency and cash handling risks such as theft. Exonumia and scrip are terms synonymous with such tokens. In the digital world, similar substitution techniques have been used since the 1970s as a means to isolate real data elements from exposure to other data systems. In databases for example, surrogate key values have been used since 1976 to isolate data associated with the internal mechanisms of databases and their external equivalents for a variety of uses in data processing. More recently, these concepts have been extended to consider this isolation tactic to provide a security mechanism for the purposes of data protection. In the payment card industry, tokenization is one means of protecting sensitive cardholder data in order to comply with industry standards and government regulations. Tokenization was applied to payment card data by Shift4 Corporation and released to the public during an industry Security Summit in Las Vegas, Nevada in 2005. The technology is meant to prevent the theft of the credit card information in storage. Shift4 defines tokenization as: "The concept of using a non-decryptable piece of data to represent, by reference, sensitive or secret data. In payment card industry (PCI) context, tokens are used to reference cardholder data that is managed in a tokenization system, application or off-site secure facility." To protect data over its full lifecycle, tokenization is often combined with end-to-end encryption to secure data in transit to the tokenization system or service, with a token replacing the original data on return. For example, to avoid the risks of malware stealing data from low-trust systems such as point of sale (POS) systems, as in the Target breach of 2013, cardholder data encryption must take place prior to card data entering the POS and not after. Encryption takes place within the confines of a security hardened and validated card reading device and data remains encrypted until received by the processing host, an approach pioneered by Heartland Payment Systems as a means to secure payment data from advanced threats, now widely adopted by industry payment processing companies and technology companies. The PCI Council has also specified end-to-end encryption (certified point-to-point encryption—P2PE) for various service implementations in various PCI Council Point-to-point Encryption documents. == The tokenization process == The process of tokenization consists of the following steps: The application sends the tokenization data and authentication information to the tokenization system. It is stopped if authentication fails and the data is delivered to an event management system. As a result, administrators can discover problems and effectively manage the system. The system moves on to the next phase if authentication is successful. Using one-way cryptographic or random generation techniques, a token is generated and kept in a highly secure data vault. The new token is provided to the application for further use, replacing the sensitive data for processing and storage. Tokenization systems share several components according to established standards. Token generation is the process of producing a token using any means, such as one-way nonreversible cryptographic functions (e.g., a hash function with a strong, secret salt) or assignment via a randomly generated number. Random number generator (RNG) techniques are often the best choice for generating token values. Token mapping – this is the process of assigning the created token value to its original value. To enable permitted look-ups of the original value using the token as the index, a secure cross-reference database must be constructed. Token data store – this is a central repository for the token mapping process that holds the original sensitive values and their related token values. Sensitive data and token values must be securely kept in an encrypted format. Management of cryptographic keys. Strong key management procedures are required for sensitive data encryption on token data stores. == Difference from encryption == Tokenization and "classic" encryption effectively protect data if implemented properly, and a computer security system may use both. While similar in certain regards, tokenization and classic encryption differ in a few key aspects. Both are cryptographic data security methods and the
Read more →