AI Art Hands

AI Art Hands — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Artificial intelligence and elections

  As artificial intelligence (AI) has become more mainstream, there is growing concern about how this will influence elections. Potential targets of AI include election processes, election offices, election officials and election vendors. There are also global efforts to improve elections using AI. == Tactics == Generative AI capabilities allow creation of misleading content. Examples of this include text-to-video, deepfake videos, text-to-image, AI-altered images, text-to-speech, voice cloning, and text-to-text. In the context of an election, a deepfake video of a candidate may propagate information that the candidate does not endorse. Chatbots could spread misinformation related to election locations, times or voting methods. In contrast to malicious actors in the past, these techniques require little technical skill and can spread rapidly. LLM-generated messages have the capacity to persuade humans on political issues. Researchers have begun to investigate how people rate messages that LLMs generate for how persuasive they are. When it came to policy issues, the LLM-generated messages received a 2.91 compared to a 2.80 when it came to smartness between the AI and humans. The LLM-generated messages were often more technical and analytical than human-generated messages. Generative AI has been used to micro-target people during tight political elections. The generation of targeted large language models has triggered concern that they will be used to leverage readily scale microtargeting. Rephrasing inputs have been used to generate fraudulent emails and phishing websites. Rephrasing inputs in a microtargeting does not violate the terms of OpenAI usage. There are no safeguards to prevent the use of rephrasing and creation of fraudulent emails. Political campaign managers have access to this allowing for them to create targeted content. == Usage by country == === Argentina === ==== 2023 elections ==== During the 2023 Argentine primary elections, Javier Milei's team distributed AI generated images including a fabricated image of his rival Sergio Massa and drew 3 million views. The team also created an unofficial Instagram account entitled "AI for the Homeland." Sergio Massa's team also distributed AI generated images and videos. === Bangladesh === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the run up to the 2024 Bangladeshi general election, deepfake videos of female opposition politicians appeared. Rumin Farhana was pictured in a bikini while Nipun Ray was shown in a swimming pool. === Canada === ==== 2025 elections ==== In the run up to the 2025 Canadian federal election, the use of AI tools is likely to figure prominently. India, Pakistan and Iran are all expected to make efforts to subvert the national vote using disinformation campaigns to deceive voters and sway diaspora communities. In a report by the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security called "Cyber Threats to Canada's Democratic Process: 2025 Update", it states that malicious actors including China and Russia: "are most likely to use generative AI as a means of creating and spreading disinformation, designed to sow division among Canadians and push narratives conducive to the interests of foreign states". === France === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the 2024 French legislative election, deepfake videos appeared claiming: i) That they showed the family of Marine le Pen. In the videos, young women, supposedly Le Pen's nieces, are seen skiing, dancing and at the beach "while making fun of France’s racial minorities": However, the family members don't exist. On social media there were over 2 million views. ii) In a video seen on social media, a deepfake video of a France24 broadcast appeared to report that the Ukrainian leadership had "tried to lure French president Emmanuel Macron to Ukraine to assassinate him and then blame his death on Russia". === Ghana === ==== 2024 elections ==== During the months before the December 2024 Ghanaian general election, a network of at least 171 fake accounts has been used to spam social media. Posts have been used by a group identified as "@TheTPatriots" to promote the New Patriotic Party, although it is not known whether the two are connected. All the networks' posts were "highly likely" to have been generated by ChatGPT and appear to be the "first secretly partisan network using AI to influence elections in Ghana". The opposition National Democratic Congress was also criticized with its leader John Mahama being called a drunkard. === India === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the 2024 Indian general election, politicians used deepfakes in their campaign materials. These deepfakes included politicians who had died prior to the election. Mathuvel Karunanidhi's party posted with his likeness even though he had died 2018. A video The All-India Anna Dravidian Progressive Federation party posted showed an audio clip of Jayaram Jayalalithaa even though she had died in 2016. The Deepfakes Analysis Unit (DAU) is an open source platform created in March 2024 for the public to share misleading content and assess if it had been AI-generated. AI was also used to translate political speeches in real time. This translating ability was widely used to reach more voters. === Indonesia === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the 2024 Indonesian presidential election, Prabowo Subianto made extensive use of AI-generated art in his campaign, which ranged from images of himself as an adorable child to various child portrayals in his advertisements. The Indonesian Children's Protection Commission condemned these ads, labeling them as a form of misuse. Other candidates, Anies Baswedan and Ganjar Pranowo, also incorporated AI art into their campaigns. Throughout the election period, all presidential candidates faced attacks from deepfakes, both in video and audio formats. === Ireland === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the last weeks of the 2024 Irish general election a spoof election poster appeared in Dublin featuring "an AI-generated candidate with three arms". The candidate is called Aidan Irwin, but no-one stood in the election with that name. A slogan on the poster says "put matters into artificial intelligence’s hands". The convincing election poster shows a man that "has six fingers on one hand, three arms, and a distorted thumb". === New Zealand === ==== 2023 elections ==== In May 2023, ahead of the 2023 New Zealand general election in October 2023, the New Zealand National Party published a "series of AI-generated political advertisements" on its Instagram account. After confirming that the images were faked, a party spokesperson said that it was "an innovative way to drive our social media". === Pakistan === ==== 2024 elections ==== AI has been used by the imprisoned ex-Prime Minister Imran Khan and his media team in the 2024 Pakistani general election: i) An AI generated audio of his voice was added to a video clip and was broadcast at a virtual rally. ii) An op-ed in The Economist written by Khan was later claimed by himself to have been written by AI which was later denied by his team. The article was liked and shared on social media by thousands of users. === South Africa === ==== 2024 elections ==== In the 2024 South African general election, there were several uses of AI content: i) A deepfaked video of Joe Biden emerged on social media showing him saying that "The U.S. would place sanctions on SA and declare it an enemy state if the African National Congress (ANC) won". ii) In a deepfake video, Donald Trump was shown endorsing the uMkhonto weSizwe party. It was posted to social media and was viewed more than 158,000 times. iii) Less than 3 months before the elections, a deepfake video showed U.S. rapper Eminem endorsing the Economic Freedom Fighters party while criticizing the ANC. The deepfake was viewed on social media more than 173,000 times. === South Korea === ==== 2022 elections ==== In the 2022 South Korean presidential election, a committee for one presidential candidate Yoon Suk Yeol released an AI avatar 'Al Yoon Seok-yeol' that would campaign in places the candidate could not go. The other presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung introduced a chatbot that provided information about the candidate's pledges. ==== 2024 elections ==== Deepfakes were used to spread misinformation before the 2024 South Korean legislative election with one source reporting 129 deepfake violations of election laws within a two week period. Seoul hosted the 2024 Summit for Democracy, a virtual gathering of world leaders initiated by US President Joe Biden in 2021. The focus of the summit was on digital threats to democracy including artificial intelligence and deepfakes. === Taiwan === ==== 2024 elections ==== AI-generated content was used during the 2024 Taiwanese presidential election. Among the media were: i) A deepfake video of General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping which showed him supporting the presidential elections. Created on social media, the video was "widely circulated

  Read more →
• 

  Smart-ID

  Smart-ID is an electronic authentication tool developed by SK ID Solutions, an Estonian company. Users can log in to various electronic services and sign documents with an electronic signature. Smart-ID meets the European Union's eIDAS Regulation and the European Central Bank's standards for a secure authentication solution. Smart-ID is a Qualified Signature Creator Device (QSCD) that can issue a Qualified Electronic Signature (QES). The Smart-ID app is compatible with both iOS and Android devices and does not require a SIM card. By 2021, the Smart-ID application was launched in the Huawei AppGallery. As of May 2023, Smart-ID has 3,298,969 active users across the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia). Every month, the Smart-ID processes 79 million transactions. In March 2023, Smart-ID users made an exceptional 85 million transactions. == History == In November 2016, SK ID Solutions debuted the Smart-ID tool for the first time at its annual conference. In February 2017, eKool, Starman, and Tallinn Kaubamaja Grupp were the first to implement Smart-ID authentication in their e-services. In March 2017, Smart-ID was added as an authentication option to SEB bank and Swedbank's online banking in all three Baltic States. Dokobit, previously known as DigiDoc, began offering its clients the ability to use e-services using Smart-ID in April 2017. More than 100 service providers had implemented Smart-ID as an authentication solution for their services by November 2019. At its annual conference on November 8, 2018, SK ID Solutions revealed that Smart-ID had been certified as compatible with the QSCD[8] level, the highest level of qualified electronic signature in the European Union, following a rigorous certification process. As a result, the Smart-QES-level ID's electronic signature, the digital counterpart of a handwritten signature, is now available to all users who have registered with the tool. This signature is accepted by all European Union member states. On August 26, 2019, Estonian Information Systems Supervisory Authority experts reviewed Smart-ID (ISSA). Based on the methods provided in the eIDAS Regulation, the expert committee concluded that Smart-ID offers a high level of electronic identification assurance. SK ID Solutions and RIA struck an agreement in September 2019 that allows Smart-ID to authenticate Estonian state e-services via RIA's central authentication service, which is used by over 60 public authorities. Smart-ID accounts created three years ago have expired in January 2020. Therefore, renewing them and performing mandatory updates was necessary. In February 2020, SK ID Solutions announced that Smart-ID could be used to give digital signatures in the national digital signature software DigiDoc4, which up until this moment was only possible with ID cards via Mobile-ID. Users must have at least version 4.2.4.71 or later of the DigiDoc4 software installed on their computers to use this feature. Since February 2020, Smart-ID accounts can now be created with biometric information from an ID card or passport, but only by users who have previously used a Smart-ID account. Since October 2022, 13–17 years old minors in Lithuania are able to create a Smart-ID account using biometric information too. A parent or legal guardian must approve the registration. SK ID Solutions collaborated on the new solution with iProov from the United Kingdom and InnoValor from the Netherlands. TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH, a German certification company, assessed it. Since May 2023, Smart-ID can be used to submit company's annual reports in Estonia and digitally sign anything in the e-business register using your PIN2. == Overview == The Smart-ID app is available for download on Google Play and Apple's App Store. Android 4.4 and iOS 11 are the oldest supported operating system versions for Smart-ID. Smart-ID works on the premise of two-factor authentication, combining an intelligent device (something the user owns) with PINs (something the user knows). A new user must first authenticate themselves with an ID card or a mobile phone number and then confirm a PIN1 and PIN2 code, either manually or automatically produced. The first PIN is used to authenticate a person's identity when accessing e-banking or e-services, while the second PIN is used to support electronic signatures and authenticate transactions (e.g., transfers). The PIN1 code must be four digits long, while the PIN2 code must be five digits long. To log in to an e-service, the user must use Smart-ID as the authentication method and enter their unique Smart-ID user ID. A notification will open on the user's smart device where the software is installed and display a verification code. If the code matches the code presented to the user by the e-service, then the user can confirm the match by entering their PIN1 code. The user must verify the action with their PIN2 code when giving digital signatures. A Smart-ID account is valid for three years. The report can be updated, changed, and deleted at any given time, free of charge. Smart-ID is available in five languages: Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Russian, and English. An international survey conducted in 2021 revealed that Smart-ID is the most reliable authentication solution in Baltic countries. In January 2023, the number of times Smart-ID was used to access State Authentication Service (TARA) in Estonia has surpassed those of Mobile-ID and ID-cards for the first time since July 2022. == Security == Smart-ID is based on Cybernetica's SplitKey authentication and digital signature platform technology, for which the company has filed a patent application. Public key cryptography, digital signature methods, and critical public infrastructures are all used in the technology. The user's PIN is not saved on the device and is only needed to decrypt the private key in the Smart-ID app. When the user inputs the PIN, the private key is cracked, and the answer is transmitted to the Smart-ID server, where a portion of the key given by the app is joined with the server's encrypted key. The app will block the user from accessing it for three hours if they input the incorrect PIN three times in a row. If this happens once again, the app will lock for 24 hours. If this happens a third time, the account will be permanently disabled. PINs cannot be changed or recovered once an account has been created. The user must create a new account if the account is permanently blocked. Smart-ID uses the Apple and Google messaging networks to notify the app when new data is saved on its servers. == Phishing == In February 2019, unknown criminals attempted to create Smart-ID accounts with stolen IDs obtained via phishing customers' text messages and website addresses, according to a monthly report by the Estonian Information System Manager in April 2019. The Latvian Information Technology Security Incident Assessment Body Cert was also notified of these intrusions on March 1. Fraudsters sent emails to potential victims pretending to be bank representatives. The mails linked users to a phishing page after redirecting them to a phony bank login page. Victims were asked to log in using their identification information and PIN1 code. The fraudsters then began the process of generating a new Smart-ID account. As a result, the victim had to input a PIN2 number, which permitted the fraudster to finish setting up a new tab with the victim's personal information. Fraudsters in Estonia were able to log in to multiple e-services utilizing Smart-ID using a Smart-ID account and the victim's data. On behalf of the victims, fraudsters also employed online banking services. Later, the Estonian Information System Manager identified several victims, some of whom had also experienced financial losses. The Estonian Information System Manager requested a full report on the event from SK ID Solutions. The organization opted not to criticize the corporation after receiving the information, although it did propose that the procedure of creating Smart-ID accounts be reviewed. According to the Estonian Banking Association, Estonian banks have not discontinued using Smart-ID and do not think it is required. Smart-ID was exposed to a thorough review process in September 2019 to determine this authentication instrument's level of security. Reviewers discovered no flaws, and SK ID Solutions and the Estonian Information System Manager signed a contract. Estonia later introduced Smart-ID and other authentication mechanisms to the central public services portal.

  Read more →
• 

  Forking lemma

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

  Read more →
• 

  Key Transparency

  Key Transparency allows communicating parties to verify public keys used in end-to-end encryption. In many end-to-end encryption services, to initiate communication a user will reach out to a central server and request the public keys of the user with which they wish to communicate. If the central server is malicious or becomes compromised, a man-in-the-middle attack can be launched through the issuance of incorrect public keys. The communications can then be intercepted and manipulated. Additionally, legal pressure could be applied by surveillance agencies to manipulate public keys and read messages. With Key Transparency, public keys are posted to a public log that can be universally audited. Communicating parties can verify public keys used are accurate.

  Read more →
• 

  Supper (Spotify)

  Supper is a web-based application on the Spotify digital music streaming platform. The Supper app was born from a group of friends who had backgrounds in the music and gastronomy industries. Digital music solutions company Artisan Council later executed it. The app now sits in the top 40 applications on Spotify. == About == The Supper Spotify application matches recipes for all occasions and skill levels with a playlist for both preparation and presentation, as envisioned by the chefs themselves. Supper is credited with being one of the first apps to pair music with food. Playing on the social nature of music and food culture, users can seamlessly experience both for the first time with real time music streaming. == Supper.mx == In May 2014 Supper was launched outside of the Spotify streaming platform. Though still in partnership with Spotify, supper.mx allows users to view Supper's music + food collaborations on mobile, tablet and desktop, without the need to download Spotify directly. == Curators == All of the recipes and playlists featured on the Supper app come straight from a growing network of tastemakers, including chefs, musicians and institutions around the world. Each month the recipes and playlists are updated in conjunction with current holidays, events and seasons. === Launch === Launching in October 2013 the first edition of Supper featured content from a range of eating institutions and culture makers from the US and Australia. Brooklyn Bowl (Brooklyn) Roberta's Pizza (Brooklyn) Fancy Hanks (Melbourne) The Foresters/Queenies Upstairs (Sydney) Hipstamatic Panama House (Bondi) Sweetwater Inn (Melbourne) Soul Clap (Syd record label) Yellow Birds (Melbourne) === November 2013 === Yardbird (Hong Kong) Sonoma Bakery (Sydney) Do or Dine (Brooklyn) Cameo Gallery (Brooklyn) Hypertrak (Blog) Blue Smoke (NYC) The Crepes of Wrath (Blog) Willin Low // Wild Rocket - Wild Oats - Relish === December 2013 === The Copper Mill (Sydney) Thug Kitchen Mamak (Sydney) Tutu's (Brooklyn) Chin Chin (Melbourne) Flat Iron Steak (London) Greasy Spoon (Copenhagen) === January 2014 === Mexicali Taco & Co. (LA) Church & State (LA) Salts Cure (LA) Nopa (SF) L & E Oyster (LA) 4100 bar (LA) Golden Gopher (LA) The Pie Hole (LA) State Bird Provisions (SF) === Momofuku === In February 2014 Supper teamed up with restaurant heavy weights Momofuku. The recipes featured came from their iconic New York, Toronto and Sydney restaurants. Head office also got involved with an instructional from Brand Director Sue Chan on how to paint Momofuku vibes on to any party. === SXSW === March sees the Supper team migrate to Austin, Texas for SXSW, bringing together the best eateries the city has to offer as well as the music that has influenced them. Restaurants and eateries on board in 2014 included: The Backspace Kelis Swifts Attic Uchi Jackalope Paul Qui/East Side King Thai Kun Wonderland Hole in the Wall Justine's Brasserie The Liberty === Kelis === In April 2014 Kelis presented 5 of her recipes paired with a personal playlist for Supper. Kelis shared her recipes for apple farro, jerk ribs, New York vanilla bean cheesecake and Jerk Ribs. The Kelis/Supper collaboration coincided with the release of Kelis' 2014 album titled 'Food'. === Roberta's Pizza === In May 2014 Bushwick's Roberta's Pizza was guest curator on the Supper app and website. Included in their selections were restaurants and bars from across New York including Bun-ker Vietnamese, Old Stanley's Bar, St. Anselm, Chuko, Frank's Cocktail Lounge, Junior's Cheesecake, Xi'an Famous Foods, Xe Lua, 124 Old Rabbit and Yuji Ramen.

  Read more →
• 

  Multiple encryption

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

  Read more →
• 

  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 →
• 

  IBM remote batch terminals

  The IBM 2780 and the IBM 3780 are devices developed by IBM for performing remote job entry (RJE) and other batch functions over telephone lines; they communicate with the mainframe via Binary Synchronous Communications (BSC or Bisync) and replaced older terminals using synchronous transmit-receive (STR). In addition, IBM has developed workstation programs for the 1130, 360/20, 2922, System/360 other than 360/20, System/370 and System/3. == 2780 Data Transmission Terminal == The 2780 Data Transmission Terminal first shipped in 1967. It consists of: A line printer similar to the IBM 1443 that can print up to 240 lines per minute (lpm), or 300 lpm using an extremely restricted character set. A card reader/punch unit, similar to an IBM 1442, that can read up to 400 cards per minute (cpm) and can punch up to 355 cpm. A line buffer that stores data received or to be transmitted over the communications line. A binary synchronous adapter which controls the flow of data over the communications line. The 2780 is capable of local (offline) card to print operation. It comes in four models: Model 1: Can read punched cards and transmit the data to a remote host computer, and can receive and print data sent by the host. Model 2: Same as Model 1 but adds the ability to punch card data received from the host. Model 3: Can only print data received from the host, but not send data to it. Model 4: Can read and punch card data, but has no printing capabilities. The 2780 uses a dedicated communication line at speeds of 1200, 2000, 2400 or 4800 bits per second. It is a half duplex device, although full duplex lines can be used with some increase in throughput. It can communicate in Transcode (a 6-bit code), 8-bit EBCDIC, or 7-bit ASCII. == 2770 Data Communication System == The 2770, announced in 1969, "was said to surpass all other IBM terminals in the variety of available input-output devices." The 2770 was developed by the IBM General Products Division (GPD) in Rochester, MN. It comes standard with a desktop terminal with keyboard. The printer and other devices (any two in any combination) can be attached to the 2772 Multi-Purpose Control unit. Possible devices include: 50 Magnetic Data Inscriber 545 Card Punch Model 3 (non-printing) or Model 4 (printing) 1017 Paper Tape Reader 1018 Paper Tape Punch 1053 Printer Model 1 1255 Magnetic Character Reader Models 1, 2 or 3 2203 Printer Model A1 or A2 2213 Printer Model 1 or 2 2265 Display Station Model 2 2502 Card Reader Model A1 or A2 5496 Data Recorder == 3780 Data Communications Terminal == In May 1972, IBM announced the IBM 3780, an enhanced version of the 2780. The 3780 was developed by IBM's Data Processing Division (DPD). There is one model, with an optional card punch. The 3780 drops Transcode support and incorporates several performance enhancements. It supports compression of blank fields in data using run-length encoding. It provides the ability to interleave data between devices, introduces double buffering, and adds support for the Wait-before-transmit ACKnowledgement (WACK) and Temporary Text Delay (TTD) Binary Synchronous control characters. The integrated punched card unit can read cards at 600 cards per minute. The integrated printer is rated at 300, 350 or 425 lines per minute based on characters set (63, 52 or 39 characters). The 3781 Card Punch is an optional feature. It punches 160 columns per second, or 91 cards per minute if all 80 columns are punched. The IBM 2780 and 3780 were later emulated on various types of equipment, including eventually the personal computer. A notable early emulation was the DN60, by Digital Equipment Corporation in the late 1970s. == 3770 Data Communications System == In 1974 IBM Data Processing Division (DPD) offered a successor to the 3780, called the 3770 Data Communications System, supporting SDLC, BSC, BSC Multi-leaving and SNA, depending on the configuration. The 3770 is a family of desk console style terminals that offers a variety of keyboard and printer combinations as well as I/O equipment attachment and communications features. The terminals come built into a desk and include the following models: 3771 Communication Terminal (optional card reader, optional card punch, wire matrix printer) Models 1 (40 cps printer), 2 (80 cps printer), and 3 (120 cps printer). 3773 Communication Terminal (diskette, wire matrix printer) Models 1 (40 cps printer), 2 (80 cps printer), and 3 (120 cps printer). Each model has a P version which adds some programming features. 3774 Communication Terminal (optional card reader, optional card punch, optional belt printer, wire matrix printer) Models 1 (80 cps printer), and 2 (120 cps printer). Each model has a P version which adds some programming features, a 480-character display and a non-removable diskette. 3775 Communication Terminal (optional card reader, optional card punch, optional diskette, belt printer) Model 1 (120 lpm printer). The model P1 adds some programming features, a 480-character display and a non-removable diskette. 3776 Communication Terminal (optional card reader, optional card punch, optional diskette, belt printer) Models 1 (300 lpm printer) and 2 (400 lpm printer). Models 3 and 4 are similar to models 1 and 2. 3777 Communication Terminal (optional card reader, optional diskette, train printer) Model 1 (up to 1000 lpm printer depending on character set). Model 2 adds an optional card punch, model 3 adds an optional magnetic tape drive and model 4 replaces the train printer with a slower model called the IBM 3262. The model 4 also allows a second, optional, 3262. The following I/O devices can be attached to a 3770 terminal: IBM 2502 Card Reader: Models A1 (up to 150 card per minute), A2 (up to 300 cards per minute) or A3 (up to 400 cards per minute) IBM 3203 Printer Model 3: 1000 LPM using 48 character set IBM 3501 Card Reader: Up to 50 cards per minute desktop unit IBM 3521 Card Punch: Up to 50 cards per minute IBM 3782 Card Attachment unit, which allows the 2502 or 3521 to be attached to any terminal except the 3777 IBM 3784 Line Printer, can be attached to a 3774 as a second printer. Up to 155 LPM with 48 characters set print belt. == Workstation programs == IBM distributes workstation programs with systems software including OS/360 Attached Support Processor (ASP) Houston Automatic Spooling Priority (HASP and HASP II) Operating System/Virtual Storage 1 (OS/VS1) Operating System/Virtual Storage 2 (OS/VS2 MVS) Release 2 through 3.8 MVS versions from MVS/SP Version 1 through z/OS Priority Output Writers, Execution processors and input Readers (POWER) Remote Spooling Communications Subsystem (RSCS) Except for the RJE workstation programs in OS/360, these programs use a variation of BSC known as Multi-leaving. In addition, IBM provides separately ordered workstation programs using BSC. Systems Network Architecture (SNA) and TCP/IP. Workstation programs are available from IBM and third-party vendors to support all of these protocols: 2770/3770 2780/3780 Multileaving Network Job Entry (NJE) OS/360 RJE SNA TCP/IP

  Read more →
• 

  Vujak

  VuJak is an early video sampler, a VJ remix and mashup tool created in 1992 by Brian Kane, Lisa Eisenpresser, and Jay Haynes. The original name of the project was Mideo, but it was later changed to VuJak. VuJak was based on MIDI control of video in real-time. It was created with MAX from Opcode Systems, and utilized the newly released QuickTime 1.0 movie object. The first working version of the program was built on a Mac IIfx with 8 megs of ram, and could jump in real-time across a 160 x 120 pixel QuickTime movie via a midi keyboard. Later versions could manipulate full screen video, included the first real-time video scratch feature, had looping, vari-speed, and random play features, and allowed for recording and editing of video sequences within the application. VuJak also had networking capabilities which allowed artists to "jam" in real time across standard phone lines. The first public exhibition of VuJak was at the Digital Hollywood conference in Beverly Hills in 1993, where it was promoted by Timothy Leary. VuJak was featured in Mondo 2000, CBS Evening News, Wired Magazine, Electronic Musician, Billboard Magazine, The Hollywood Reporter, and it was used to create promotional videos for MTV. In 1994, VuJak was a featured interactive exhibition at the Exploratorium in San Francisco. Development of VuJak ceased in 1995.

  Read more →
• 

  Cambridge Analytica

  Cambridge Analytica Ltd. (CA), previously known as SCL USA, was a British political consulting firm that came to prominence through the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal. It was founded in 2013, as a subsidiary of the private intelligence company and self-described "global election management agency" SCL Group by long-time SCL executives Nigel Oakes, Alexander Nix and Alexander Oakes, with Nix as CEO. Cambridge Analytica was hired by a variety of political actors, including the Trinidadian government in 2010 and the 2016 presidential campaigns of Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. The firm maintained offices in London, New York City, and Washington, D.C. The company closed operations in 2018 due to backlash from the scandal, although firms related to both Cambridge Analytica and its parent firm SCL still exist. == History == Cambridge Analytica was founded in 2013 as a subsidiary of the private intelligence company SCL Group, which describes itself as providing "data, analytics and strategy to governments and military organisations worldwide". The company was part of "an international web of companies" headed by the London-based SCL Group. Cambridge Analytica (SCL USA) was incorporated in January 2013 with its registered office being in Westferry Circus, London and consisting of just one staff member, director and CEO Alexander Nix (also appointed in January 2015). Nix was also the director of nine similar companies sharing the same registered offices in London, including Firecrest technologies, Emerdata and six SCL Group companies including "SCL elections limited". Nigel Oakes, known as the former boyfriend of Lady Helen Windsor, had founded the predecessor SCL Group in the 1990s, and in 2005 Oakes established SCL Group together with his brother Alexander Oakes and Alexander Nix; SCL Group was the parent company of Cambridge Analytica. Former Conservative minister and MP Sir Geoffrey Pattie was the founding chairman of SCL; Lord Ivar Mountbatten also joined Oakes as a director of the company. As a result of the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal, Nix was removed as CEO and replaced by Julian Wheatland before the company closed. Several of the company's executives were Old Etonians. The company's owners included several of the Conservative Party's largest donors such as billionaire Vincent Tchenguiz, former British Conservative minister Jonathan Marland, Baron Marland and the family of American hedge fund manager Robert Mercer. The company combined misappropriation of digital assets, data mining, data brokerage, and data analysis with strategic communication during electoral processes. While its parent SCL had focused on influencing elections in developing countries since the 1990s, Cambridge Analytica focused more on the western world, including the United Kingdom and the United States; CEO Alexander Nix has said CA was involved in 44 U.S. political races in 2014. In 2015, CA performed data analysis services for Ted Cruz's presidential campaign. In 2016, CA worked for Donald Trump's presidential campaign as well as for Leave.EU (one of the organisations campaigning in the United Kingdom's referendum on European Union membership). CA's role in those campaigns has been controversial and is the subject of ongoing inquiries in both countries. Political scientists question CA's claims about the effectiveness of its methods of targeting voters. == Data scandal == In March 2018, media outlets broke news of Cambridge Analytica's business practices. The New York Times and The Observer reported that the company had acquired and used personal data about Facebook users from an external researcher who had told Facebook he was collecting it for academic purposes. Shortly afterwards, Channel 4 News aired undercover investigative videos showing Nix boasting about using prostitutes, bribery sting operations, and honey traps to discredit politicians on whom it had conducted opposition research, and saying that the company "ran all of (Donald Trump's) digital campaign". In response to the media reports, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) of the UK pursued a warrant to search the company's servers. Facebook banned Cambridge Analytica from advertising on its platform, saying that it had been deceived. On 23 March 2018, the British High Court granted the ICO a warrant to search Cambridge Analytica's London offices. As a result, Nix was suspended as CEO, and replaced by Julian Wheatland. The personal data of up to 87 million Facebook users were acquired via the 270,000 Facebook users who used a Facebook app created by Aleksandr Kogan called "This Is Your Digital Life". This was a personality profiling app and asked simple personality questions similar to other Facebook quizzes. Kogan was a scientist and psychologist, also being an employed lecturer for the University of Cambridge from 2012 to 2018. Alexander Nix claimed they had close to five thousand data points on each person who participated. They also gathered information through other data brokers ending with them acquiring millions of data points from American citizens. Kogan's app exploited a feature of Facebook's Graph API (version 1.0), which permitted any third-party app to access not only the app user's data, but also the full profile data of all of that user's Facebook friends, without those friends' knowledge or consent. This platform-wide design was available to all developers and was used by tens of thousands of apps; Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg later told the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the company was auditing "tens of thousands" of apps that had had access to large amounts of user data. Because the average Facebook user at the time had approximately 300 friends, the 270,000 users who installed Kogan's app yielded data on up to 87 million people. Facebook deprecated the friends-data API in April 2014 and shut it down entirely in April 2015, but data already collected by apps remained in developers' possession. Kogan passed this data to Cambridge Analytica, breaching Facebook's terms of service. On 1 May 2018, Cambridge Analytica and its parent company SCL filed for insolvency proceedings and closed operations. Alexander Tayler, a former director for Cambridge Analytica, was appointed director of Emerdata on 28 March 2018. Rebekah Mercer, Jennifer Mercer, Alexander Nix and Johnson Chun Shun Ko, who has links to American businessman Erik Prince, are in leadership positions at Emerdata. The Russo brothers are producing an upcoming film on Cambridge Analytica. In 2019 the Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint against Cambridge Analytica for misuse of data. In 2020, the British Information Commissioner's Office closed a three-year inquiry into the company, concluded that Cambridge Analytica was "not involved" in the 2016 Brexit referendum and found no additional evidence for Russia's alleged interference during the campaign. US sensitive polling and election data, however, were passed to Russian Intelligence via a Cambridge Analytica contractor Sam Patten, Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, and Russian agent Konstantin Kilimnik, who was indicted during the affair. Publicly, parent company SCL Group called itself a "global election management agency", Politico reported it was known for involvement "in military disinformation campaigns to social media branding and voter targeting". SCL gained work on a large number of campaigns for the US and UK governments' war on terror advancing their model of behavioral conflict during the 2000s. SCL's involvement in the political world has been primarily in the developing world where it has been used by the military and politicians to study and manipulate public opinion and political will. Slate writer Sharon Weinberger compared one of SCL's hypothetical test scenarios to fomenting a coup. Among the investors in Cambridge Analytica were some of the Conservative Party's largest donors such as billionaire Vincent Tchenguiz, former Conservative minister Jonathan Marland, Baron Marland, Roger Gabb, the family of American hedge fund manager Robert Mercer, and Steve Bannon. A minimum of 15 million dollars has been invested into the company by Mercer, according to The New York Times. Bannon's stake in the company was estimated at 1 to 5 million dollars, but he divested his holdings in April 2017 as required by his role as White House Chief Strategist. In March 2018, Jennifer Mercer and Rebekah Mercer became directors of Emerdata limited. In March 2018 it became public by Christopher Wylie, that Cambridge Analytica's first activities were founded on a data set, which its parent company SCL bought 2014 from a company named Global Science Research founded by Aleksandr Kogan and his team present across the world who worked as a psychologist at Cambridge. During Boris Johnson's tenure as foreign secretary, the Foreign Office sought advice from Cambridge Analytica and Boris Johnson had a meeting with Alexander N

  Read more →
• 

  TikTokification

  TikTokification (also written TikTok-ification) is a term used to describe the widespread adoption of TikTok's short-form, vertical video format and its algorithmic content-delivery model across the broader social media landscape. The phenomenon encompasses the strategic and cultural changes made by competing platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat, and LinkedIn in response to TikTok's global dominance. Beyond platform design, the term is also used more broadly to describe shifts in media consumption habits, advertising strategies, and, more critically, the potential cognitive and psychological effects associated with constant short-form video consumption. == Background == === Origins of short-form video === The short-form video format predates TikTok. Vine, launched in 2013, popularised six-second looping videos before shutting down in 2017. TikTok itself, known as Douyin in the Chinese market, was created by the Chinese technology company ByteDance in September 2016. Following its international expansion and its 2018 merger with Musical.ly, TikTok grew rapidly. By 2020, the application had surpassed two billion total downloads worldwide, with over 800 million monthly active users. A key driver of TikTok's success was its recommendation algorithm. The platform's "For You Page" (FYP) serves content to users based on behaviour rather than follower count, making it possible for unknown creators to achieve widespread reach organically. Analysts noted that TikTok serves "fast, visually engaging, and authentic videos that feel more like entertainment than advertising," fundamentally reshaping consumer expectations of digital content. TikTok has been described as "the center of the internet for young people," where users go for entertainment, news, trends, and shopping. As of the mid-2020s, TikTok had approximately 1.12 billion monthly active users. == Platform responses == TikTok's success compelled nearly every major social media platform to restructure its product around short-form video. In 2020, Instagram launched Reels and YouTube launched Shorts, both directly in response to TikTok's growth. Platforms like Meta's Instagram Reels and Google's YouTube Shorts subsequently expanded aggressively, launching new features, creator tools, and even considering separate standalone applications to compete. LinkedIn, traditionally a professional networking site, began experimenting with TikTok-style short-form vertical video feeds. Facebook launched a singular unified video feed combining Reels, long videos, and live videos, similar in structure to TikTok's feed. Snapchat redesigned its application to combine Stories and Spotlight into a unified entertainment feed. YouTube extended its Shorts format to allow videos up to three minutes in length, up from the previous limit of sixty seconds, as of October 2024. Despite these adaptations, experts noted that none of TikTok's rivals had matched its algorithmic precision as of mid-2025. == Societal and cultural impact == === Media and journalism === News organisations have also been affected by TikTokification. Short-form video grew rapidly as a format for news content, driven in large part by TikTok's popularity. According to Pew Research Center, 17% of adults in the United States reported regularly getting news from TikTok in 2024, with 63% of teenagers saying they used the platform as a news source. In response, major publishers began creating bespoke short-form content for TikTok's audience, with organisations such as the BBC building dedicated internal TikTok teams. === Advertising and commerce === TikTokification has had significant effects on the advertising industry. US social video advertising spending was projected to surpass linear television advertising spending for the first time in 2025. Global social commerce sales were projected to reach approximately $900 billion in 2025, with platforms like Douyin and TikTok driving a large share of that growth. TikTok itself generated an estimated $23.6 billion in advertising revenue in 2024. Short-form video has been described as bridging the gap between brand awareness and direct conversion. Surveys have found that consumers trust user-generated content 8.7 times more than influencer content and 6.6 times more than branded content, prompting brands to favour creator-led video formats. === Attention spans and cognitive effects === A growing body of research has examined the cognitive consequences of heavy short-form video consumption, a set of effects sometimes referred to as "TikTok Brain." A large systematic review and meta-analysis published in Psychological Bulletin, analysing data from 98,299 participants across 71 studies, found that the more short-form video content a person watches, the poorer their cognitive performance in attention and inhibitory control. The review also found that greater engagement with short-form video was associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress, as well as sleep disturbances. The platform's inherent demand for engaging content has resulted in the proliferation of sludge content, a genre of split screen video with the main video on the top and an unrelated attention-grabbing video on the bottom, typically repetitive gameplay (notably of the endless runner mobile game Subway Surfers) or oddly satisfying videos, designed to maximize viewer retention in cases where the main video may appear uninteresting and would normally cause the viewer to skip it. Sludge content is often described as overstimulating, reflecting and contributing to declining attention spans, though the scholarly evidence supporting such claims is not conclusive. Dr. Yann Poncin, associate professor at the Child Study Center at Yale University, noted that "infinite scrolling and short-form video are designed to capture your attention in short bursts," contrasting this with earlier entertainment formats that guided audiences through longer narratives. Research suggests that children and teenagers may be particularly vulnerable, with early exposure to rapid frame changes potentially conditioning the brain's neural pathways to require constant stimulation, making it more challenging to engage with slower-paced activities. A separate study published in Nature Communications by researchers at the Technical University of Denmark documented a notable decrease in collective attention span over time, attributing it in part to the increasing volume and pace of content production and consumption online. Researchers caution, however, that the majority of relevant studies are cross-sectional, meaning they capture data at a single point in time and cannot establish causality. It remains possible that individuals with pre-existing conditions such as anxiety or attention deficits may be more likely to engage heavily with these platforms as a coping mechanism. === Academic and sociological analysis === Scholars have framed TikTokification within the context of the attention economy. A 2024 academic analysis described TikTok as representing "a new paradigm of social media communication" shaped by youth culture, mobile technology, and the economics of attention, in which spectators become active contributors to a shared content pipeline. The same analysis noted that TikTok "reflects a new mode of communication influenced by avant-garde cinema, the use of mobile technology, and the social habits of particular social groups." US social media users were projected to spend 61.1% of their time on social networks watching videos in 2025, up from 33.3% in 2019, before TikTok became widely popular, underscoring the scale of the behavioural shift. == Monetisation challenges == Despite high engagement levels, monetising short-form video has remained difficult for platforms and creators alike. Unlike long-form YouTube content, short clips offer limited space for advertisers to insert advertisements. YouTube Shorts pays approximately four cents per 1,000 views, considerably less than its long-form counterpart. From 2025 onward, platforms began introducing creator funds, advertisements, and AI-driven content recommendations as part of broader efforts to make short-form video economically sustainable for creators.

  Read more →
• 

  Strategic Air Command Digital Information Network

  The Strategic Air Command DIgital Network (SACDIN) was a United States military computer network that provided computerized record communications, replacing the Data Transmission Subsystem and part of the Data Display Subsystem of the SAC Automated Command and Control System. SACDIN enabled a rapid flow of communications from headquarters SAC to its fielded forces, such as B-52 bases and ICBM Launch Control Centers. == Logistics == Major portions of SACDIN were developed, engineered and installed by the International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) company, under contract to the Electronic Systems Center. == Chronology == 1969 - Headquarters SAC submits a request to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to study an expanded communications system, known as the SAC Total Information Network (SATIN). It would interconnect Air Force Satellite Communications (AFSATCOM), Advanced Airborne Command Post (AABNCP), Airborne Command Post (ABNCP), high frequency/single sideband radio HF/SSB radio, SAC Automated Command and Control System (SACCS), Automatic Digital Information Network (AUTODIN), Survivable Low Frequency Communications System (SLFCS) and Command Data Buffer (CDB) 1977 1 November - SATIN IV was effectively terminated by Congress. The restructured program was renamed SAC Digital Network (SACDIN), and was formulated to meet SAC's minimum essential data communications requirements, but also had the capability to grow in a modular fashion. 1986 ?? ??? - SACDIN replaces much of the SAC Automated Command and Control System (SACCS) and the SAC Automated Total Information Network (SATIN)

  Read more →
• 

  Learning automaton

  A learning automaton is one type of machine learning algorithm studied since 1970s. Learning automata select their current action based on past experiences from the environment. It will fall into the range of reinforcement learning if the environment is stochastic and a Markov decision process (MDP) is used. == History == Research in learning automata can be traced back to the work of Michael Lvovitch Tsetlin in the early 1960s in the Soviet Union. Together with some colleagues, he published a collection of papers on how to use matrices to describe automata functions. Additionally, Tsetlin worked on reasonable and collective automata behaviour, and on automata games. Learning automata were also investigated by researches in the United States in the 1960s. However, the term learning automaton was not used until Narendra and Thathachar introduced it in a survey paper in 1974. == Definition == A learning automaton is an adaptive decision-making unit situated in a random environment that learns the optimal action through repeated interactions with its environment. The actions are chosen according to a specific probability distribution which is updated based on the environment response the automaton obtains by performing a particular action. With respect to the field of reinforcement learning, learning automata are characterized as policy iterators. In contrast to other reinforcement learners, policy iterators directly manipulate the policy π. Another example for policy iterators are evolutionary algorithms. Formally, Narendra and Thathachar define a stochastic automaton to consist of: a set X of possible inputs, a set Φ = { Φ1, ..., Φs } of possible internal states, a set α = { α1, ..., αr } of possible outputs, or actions, with r ≤ s, an initial state probability vector p(0) = ≪ p1(0), ..., ps(0) ≫, a computable function A which after each time step t generates p(t+1) from p(t), the current input, and the current state, and a function G: Φ → α which generates the output at each time step. In their paper, they investigate only stochastic automata with r = s and G being bijective, allowing them to confuse actions and states. The states of such an automaton correspond to the states of a "discrete-state discrete-parameter Markov process". At each time step t=0,1,2,3,..., the automaton reads an input from its environment, updates p(t) to p(t+1) by A, randomly chooses a successor state according to the probabilities p(t+1) and outputs the corresponding action. The automaton's environment, in turn, reads the action and sends the next input to the automaton. Frequently, the input set X = { 0,1 } is used, with 0 and 1 corresponding to a nonpenalty and a penalty response of the environment, respectively; in this case, the automaton should learn to minimize the number of penalty responses, and the feedback loop of automaton and environment is called a "P-model". More generally, a "Q-model" allows an arbitrary finite input set X, and an "S-model" uses the interval [0,1] of real numbers as X. A visualised demo/ Art Work of a single Learning Automaton had been developed by μSystems (microSystems) Research Group at Newcastle University. == Finite action-set learning automata == Finite action-set learning automata (FALA) are a class of learning automata for which the number of possible actions is finite or, in more mathematical terms, for which the size of the action-set is finite.

  Read more →
• 

  Kerckhoffs's principle

  Kerckhoffs's principle (also called Kerckhoffs's desideratum, assumption, axiom, doctrine or law) of cryptography was stated by the Dutch cryptographer Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century. The principle holds that a cryptosystem should be secure, even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge. This concept is widely embraced by cryptographers, in contrast to security through obscurity, which is not. Kerckhoffs's principle was phrased by the American mathematician Claude Shannon as "the enemy knows the system", i.e., "one ought to design systems under the assumption that the enemy will immediately gain full familiarity with them". In that form, it is called Shannon's maxim. Another formulation by American researcher and professor Steven M. Bellovin is: In other words—design your system assuming that your opponents know it in detail. (A former official at NSA's National Computer Security Center told me that the standard assumption there was that serial number 1 of any new device was delivered to the Kremlin.) == Origins == The invention of telegraphy radically changed military communications and increased the number of messages that needed to be protected from the enemy dramatically, leading to the development of field ciphers which had to be easy to use without large confidential codebooks prone to capture on the battlefield. It was this environment which led to the development of Kerckhoffs's requirements. Auguste Kerckhoffs was a professor of German language at Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC) in Paris. In early 1883, Kerckhoffs's article, La Cryptographie Militaire, was published in two parts in the Journal of Military Science, in which he stated six design rules for military ciphers. Translated from French, they are: The system must be practically, if not mathematically, indecipherable; It should not require secrecy, and it should not be a problem if it falls into enemy hands; It must be possible to communicate and remember the key without using written notes, and correspondents must be able to change or modify it at will; It must be applicable to telegraph communications; It must be portable, and should not require several persons to handle or operate; Lastly, given the circumstances in which it is to be used, the system must be easy to use and should not be stressful to use or require its users to know and comply with a long list of rules. Some are no longer relevant given the ability of computers to perform complex encryption. The second rule, now known as Kerckhoffs's principle, is still critically important. == Explanation of the principle == Kerckhoffs viewed cryptography as a rival to, and a better alternative than, steganographic encoding, which was common in the nineteenth century for hiding the meaning of military messages. One problem with encoding schemes is that they rely on humanly-held secrets such as "dictionaries" which disclose for example, the secret meaning of words. Steganographic-like dictionaries, once revealed, permanently compromise a corresponding encoding system. Another problem is that the risk of exposure increases as the number of users holding the secrets increases. Nineteenth century cryptography, in contrast, used simple tables which provided for the transposition of alphanumeric characters, generally given row-column intersections which could be modified by keys which were generally short, numeric, and could be committed to human memory. The system was considered "indecipherable" because tables and keys do not convey meaning by themselves. Secret messages can be compromised only if a matching set of table, key, and message falls into enemy hands in a relevant time frame. Kerckhoffs viewed tactical messages as only having a few hours of relevance. Systems are not necessarily compromised, because their components (i.e. alphanumeric character tables and keys) can be easily changed. === Advantage of secret keys === Using secure cryptography is supposed to replace the difficult problem of keeping messages secure with a much more manageable one, keeping relatively small keys secure. A system that requires long-term secrecy for something as large and complex as the whole design of a cryptographic system obviously cannot achieve that goal. It only replaces one hard problem with another. However, if a system is secure even when the enemy knows everything except the key, then all that is needed is to manage keeping the keys secret. There are a large number of ways the internal details of a widely used system could be discovered. The most obvious is that someone could bribe, blackmail, or otherwise threaten staff or customers into explaining the system. In war, for example, one side will probably capture some equipment and people from the other side. Each side will also use spies to gather information. If a method involves software, someone could do memory dumps or run the software under the control of a debugger in order to understand the method. If hardware is being used, someone could buy or steal some of the hardware and build whatever programs or gadgets needed to test it. Hardware can also be dismantled so that the chip details can be examined under the microscope. === Maintaining security === A generalization some make from Kerckhoffs's principle is: "The fewer and simpler the secrets that one must keep to ensure system security, the easier it is to maintain system security." Bruce Schneier ties it in with a belief that all security systems must be designed to fail as gracefully as possible: Kerckhoffs's principle applies beyond codes and ciphers to security systems in general: every secret creates a potential failure point. Secrecy, in other words, is a prime cause of brittleness—and therefore something likely to make a system prone to catastrophic collapse. Conversely, openness provides ductility. Any security system depends crucially on keeping some things secret. However, Kerckhoffs's principle points out that the things kept secret ought to be those least costly to change if inadvertently disclosed. For example, a cryptographic algorithm may be implemented by hardware and software that is widely distributed among users. If security depends on keeping that secret, then disclosure leads to major logistic difficulties in developing, testing, and distributing implementations of a new algorithm – it is "brittle". On the other hand, if keeping the algorithm secret is not important, but only the keys used with the algorithm must be secret, then disclosure of the keys simply requires the simpler, less costly process of generating and distributing new keys. == Applications == In accordance with Kerckhoffs's principle, the majority of civilian cryptography makes use of publicly known algorithms. By contrast, ciphers used to protect classified government or military information are often kept secret (see Type 1 encryption). However, it should not be assumed that government/military ciphers must be kept secret to maintain security. It is possible that they are intended to be as cryptographically sound as public algorithms, and the decision to keep them secret is in keeping with a layered security posture. == Security through obscurity == It is moderately common for companies to keep the inner workings of a system secret. Some argue this "security by obscurity" makes the product safer and less vulnerable to attack. A counter-argument is that keeping the innards secret may improve security in the short term, but in the long run, only systems that have been published and analyzed should be trusted. Steven Bellovin and Randy Bush commented: Security Through Obscurity Considered Dangerous Hiding security vulnerabilities in algorithms, software, and/or hardware decreases the likelihood they will be repaired and increases the likelihood that they can and will be exploited. Discouraging or outlawing discussion of weaknesses and vulnerabilities is extremely dangerous and deleterious to the security of computer systems, the network, and its citizens. Open Discussion Encourages Better Security The long history of cryptography and cryptoanalysis has shown time and time again that open discussion and analysis of algorithms exposes weaknesses not thought of by the original authors, and thereby leads to better and more secure algorithms. As Kerckhoffs noted about cipher systems in 1883 [Kerc83], "Il faut qu'il n'exige pas le secret, et qu'il puisse sans inconvénient tomber entre les mains de l'ennemi." (Roughly, "the system must not require secrecy and must be able to be stolen by the enemy without causing trouble.")

  Read more →
• 

  Personal web page

  Personal web pages are World Wide Web pages created by an individual to contain content of a personal nature rather than content pertaining to a company, organization or institution. Personal web pages are primarily used for informative or entertainment purposes but can also be used for personal career marketing (by containing a list of the individual's skills, experience and a CV), social networking with other people with shared interests, or as a space for personal expression. These terms do not usually refer to just a single "page" or HTML file, but to a website—a collection of webpages and related files under a common URL or Web address. In strictly technical terms, a site's actual home page (index page) often only contains sparse content with some catchy introductory material and serves mostly as a pointer or table of contents to the more content-rich pages inside, such as résumés, family, hobbies, family genealogy, a web log/diary ("blog"), opinions, online journals and diaries or other writing, examples of written work, digital audio sound clips, digital video clips, digital photos, or information about a user's other interests. Many personal pages only include information of interest to friends and family of the author. However, some webpages set up by hobbyists or enthusiasts of certain subject areas can be valuable topical web directories. == History == In the 1990s, most Internet service providers (ISPs) provided a free small personal, user-created webpage along with free Usenet News service. These were all considered part of full Internet service. Also several free web hosting services such as GeoCities provided free web space for personal web pages. These free web hosting services would typically include web-based site management and a few pre-configured scripts to easily integrate an input form or guestbook script into the user's site. Early personal web pages were often called "home pages" and were intended to be set as a default page in a web browser's preferences, usually by their owner. These pages would often contain links, to-do lists, and other information their author found useful. In the days when search engines were in their infancy, these pages (and the links they contained) could be an important resource in navigating the web. Since the early 2000s, the rise of blogging and the development of user friendly web page designing software made it easier for amateur users who did not have computer programming or website designer training to create personal web pages. Some website design websites provided free ready-made blogging scripts, where all the user had to do was input their content into a template. At the same time, a personal web presence became easier with the increased popularity of social networking services, some with blogging platforms such as LiveJournal and Blogger. These websites provided an attractive and easy-to-use content management system for regular users. Most of the early personal websites were Web 1.0 style, in which a static display of text and images or photos was displayed to individuals who came to the page. About the only interaction that was possible on these early websites was signing the virtual "guestbook". With the collapse of the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s, the ISP industry consolidated, and the focus of web hosting services shifted away from the surviving ISP companies to independent Internet hosting services and to ones with other affiliations. For example, many university departments provided personal pages for professors and television broadcasters provided them for their on-air personalities. These free webpages served as a perquisite ("perk") for staff, while at the same time boosting the Web visibility of the parent organization. Web hosting companies either charge a monthly fee, or provide service that is "free" (advertising based) for personal web pages. These are priced or limited according to the total size of all files in bytes on the host's hard drive, or by bandwidth, (traffic), or by some combination of both. For those customers who continue to use their ISP for these services, national ISPs commonly continue to provide both disk space and help including ready-made drop-in scripts. With the rise of Web 2.0-style websites, both professional websites and user-created, amateur websites tended to contain interactive features, such as "clickable" links to online newspaper articles or favourite websites, the option to comment on content displayed on the website, the option to "tag" images, videos or links on the site, the option of "clicking" on an image to enlarge it or find out more information, the option of user participation for website guests to evaluate or review the pages, or even the option to create new user-generated content for others to see. A key difference between Web 1.0 personal webpages and Web 2.0 personal pages was while the former tended to be created by hackers, computer programmers and computer hobbyists, the latter were created by a much wider variety of users, including individuals whose main interests lay in hobbies or topics outside of computers (e.g., indie music fans, political activists, and social entrepreneurs). == Motivations == In a study done by Zinkhan, participants had four main reasons to create personal web pages. First, people use personal web pages as a portrayal of self, in a sense marketing themselves, since creators have the freedom to portray their own identities. Second, personal web pages are a way to interact with people who have similar interests as the creator, possible employers, or colleagues. Third, personal web pages can gain social acceptance with groups that the creator is interested in depending on the information that the creator reveals about themselves. Fourth, personal web pages can give creators a sense of connection to the world since these web pages are public and a way to introduce oneself to other people around the globe. People may maintain personal web pages to serve as a showcase for their skills in professional life, creative skills or self promotion of their business, charity or band. The use of personal web pages to display an individual's professional life has become more common in the 21st century. Mary Madden, an expert researcher on privacy and technology, did a study that found a tenth of American jobs require Personal web pages that advertise an individual online. Personal web pages have become a source of initial impression of possible employees used by employers. It can also be used to express opinions on issues ranging from news and politics to movies. Others may use their personal web page as a communication method. For example, an aspiring artist might give out business cards with their personal web page, and invite people to visit their page and see their artwork, "like" their page or sign their guestbook. A personal web page gives the owner generally more control on presence in search results and how they wish to be viewed online. It also allows more freedom in types and quantity of content than a social network profile offers, and can link various social media profiles with each other. It can be used to correct the record on something, or clear up potential confusion between you and someone with the same name. In the 2010s, some amateur writers, bands and filmmakers release digital versions of their stories, songs and short films online, with the aim of gaining an audience and becoming more well-known. While the huge number of aspiring artists posting their work online makes it unlikely for individuals and groups to become popular via the Internet, there are a small number of YouTube stars who were unknown until their online performances garnered them a huge audience. == Sites of academics == Academic professionals (especially at the college and university level), including professors and researchers, are often given online space for creating and storing personal web documents, including personal web pages, CVs and a list of their books, academic papers and conference presentations, on the websites of their employers. This goes back to the early decade of the World Wide Web and its original purpose of providing a quick and easy way for academics to share research papers and data. Researchers may have a personal website to share more information about themselves, about their academic activities and for sharing (unpublished) results of their research. This has been noted as part of the success of open-access repositories such as arXiv.

  Read more →