AI Art Pragmata

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

• 

  BeyondCorp

  BeyondCorp is an implementation of zero-trust computer security concepts creating a zero trust network. It is created by Google. == Background == It was created in response to the 2009 Operation Aurora. An open source implementation inspired by Google's research paper on an access proxy is known as "transcend". Google documented its Zero Trust journey from 2014 to 2018 through a series of articles in the journal ;login:. Google called their ZT network "BeyondCorp". Google implemented a Zero Trust architecture on a large scale, and relied on user and device credentials, regardless of location. Data was encrypted and protected from managed devices. Unmanaged devices, such as BYOD, were not given access to the BeyondCorp resources. == Design and technology == BeyondCorp utilized a zero trust security model, which is a relatively new security model that it assumes that all devices and users are potentially compromised. This is in contrast to traditional security models, which rely on firewalls and other perimeter defenses to protect sensitive data. === Trust === The corporate network grants no inherent trust, and all internal apps are accessed via the BeyondCorp system, regardless of whether the user is in a Google office or working remotely. BeyondCorp is related to Zero Trust architecture as it implements a true Zero Trust network, where all access is granted on identity, device, and authentication, based on robust underlying device and identity data sources. BeyondCorp works by using a number of security policies including authentication, authorization, and access control to ensure that only authorized users can access corporate resources. Authentication verifies the identity of the user, authorization determines whether the user has permission to access the requested resource, and access control policies restrict what the user can do with the resource. ==== Trust Inferrer ==== One of the main components in BeyondCorp's implementation is the Trust Inferrer. The Trust Inferrer is a security component (typically software) that looks at information about a user's device, like a computer or phone, to decide how much it can be trusted to access certain resources like important company documents. The Trust Inferrer checks things like the security of the device, whether it has the right software installed, and if it belongs to an authorized user. Based on all this information, the Trust Inferrer decides what the device can access and what it can't. === Security mechanisms === Unlike traditional VPNs, BeyondCorp's access policies are based on information about a device, its state, and its associated user. BeyondCorp considers both internal networks and external networks to be completely untrusted, and gates access to applications by dynamically asserting and enforcing levels, or “tiers,” of access. === Device Inventory Database === BeyondCorp utilized a Device Inventory Database and Device Identity that uniquely identifies a device through a digital certificate. Any changes to the device are recorded in the Device Inventory Database. The certificate is used to uniquely identify a device; however, additional information is required to grant access privileges to a resource. === Access Control Engine === Another important component of BeyondCorp's implementation is the Access Control Engine. Think of this as the brain of the Zero Trust architecture. The Access Control Engine is like a traffic cop standing at an intersection. Its job is to make sure that only authorized devices and users are allowed to access specific resources (like files or applications) on the network. It checks the access policy (the rules that say who can access what), the device's state (like whether it has the right software updates or security settings), and the resources being requested. Then it makes a decision on whether to grant or deny access based on all of this information. It helps ensure that only the right people and devices are allowed access to the network, which helps keep things secure. The Access Control Engine utilizes the output from the Trust Inferrer and other data that is fed into its system. == Usage == One of the first things Google did to implement a Zero Trust architecture was to capture and analyze network traffic. The purpose of analyzing the traffic was to build a baseline of what typical network traffic looked like. In doing so, BeyondCorp also discovered unusual, unexpected, and unauthorized traffic. This was very useful because it gave the BeyondCorp engineers critical information that assisted them in reengineering the system in a secure manner. Some of the benefits BeyondCorp realized by adopting a Zero Trust architecture include the ability to allow their employees to work securely from any location. It reduces the risk of data breaches since data and applications are protected and users and devices are constantly being verified. The Zero Trust architecture is scalable and can be adapted to the changing needs of the businesses and their users. Especially relevant in today's work-from-home era, BeyondCorp allows employees to access enterprise resources securely from any location, without the need for traditional VPNs.

  Read more →
• 

  Key (cryptography)

  A key in cryptography is a piece of information, usually a string of numbers or letters that are stored in a file, which, when processed through a cryptographic algorithm, can encode or decode cryptographic data. Based on the used method, the key can be different sizes and varieties, but in all cases, the strength of the encryption relies on the security of the key being maintained. A key's security strength is dependent on its algorithm, the size of the key, the generation of the key, and the process of key exchange. == Scope == The key is what is used to encrypt data from plaintext to ciphertext. There are different methods for utilizing keys and encryption. === Symmetric cryptography === Symmetric cryptography refers to the practice of the same key being used for both encryption and decryption. === Asymmetric cryptography === Asymmetric cryptography has separate keys for encrypting and decrypting. These keys are known as the public and private keys, respectively. == Purpose == Since the key protects the confidentiality and integrity of the system, it is important to be kept secret from unauthorized parties. With public key cryptography, only the private key must be kept secret, but with symmetric cryptography, it is important to maintain the confidentiality of the key. Kerckhoff's principle states that the entire security of the cryptographic system relies on the secrecy of the key. == Key sizes == Key size is the number of bits in the key defined by the algorithm. This size defines the upper bound of the cryptographic algorithm's security. The larger the key size, the longer it will take before the key is compromised by a brute force attack. Since perfect secrecy is not feasible for key algorithms, researches are now more focused on computational security. In the past, keys were required to be a minimum of 40 bits in length, however, as technology advanced, these keys were being broken quicker and quicker. As a response, restrictions on symmetric keys were enhanced to be greater in size. Currently, 2048 bit RSA is commonly used, which is sufficient for current systems. However, current RSA key sizes would all be cracked quickly with a powerful quantum computer. "The keys used in public key cryptography have some mathematical structure. For example, public keys used in the RSA system are the product of two prime numbers. Thus public key systems require longer key lengths than symmetric systems for an equivalent level of security. 3072 bits is the suggested key length for systems based on factoring and integer discrete logarithms which aim to have security equivalent to a 128 bit symmetric cipher." == Key generation == To prevent a key from being guessed, keys need to be generated randomly and contain sufficient entropy. The problem of how to safely generate random keys is difficult and has been addressed in many ways by various cryptographic systems. A key can directly be generated by using the output of a Random Bit Generator (RBG), a system that generates a sequence of unpredictable and unbiased bits. A RBG can be used to directly produce either a symmetric key or the random output for an asymmetric key pair generation. Alternatively, a key can also be indirectly created during a key-agreement transaction, from another key or from a password. Some operating systems include tools for "collecting" entropy from the timing of unpredictable operations such as disk drive head movements. For the production of small amounts of keying material, ordinary dice provide a good source of high-quality randomness. == Establishment scheme == The security of a key is dependent on how a key is exchanged between parties. Establishing a secured communication channel is necessary so that outsiders cannot obtain the key. A key establishment scheme (or key exchange) is used to transfer an encryption key among entities. Key agreement and key transport are the two types of a key exchange scheme that are used to be remotely exchanged between entities . In a key agreement scheme, a secret key, which is used between the sender and the receiver to encrypt and decrypt information, is set up to be sent indirectly. All parties exchange information (the shared secret) that permits each party to derive the secret key material. In a key transport scheme, encrypted keying material that is chosen by the sender is transported to the receiver. Either symmetric key or asymmetric key techniques can be used in both schemes. The Diffie–Hellman key exchange and Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) are the most two widely used key exchange algorithms. In 1976, Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman constructed the Diffie–Hellman algorithm, which was the first public key algorithm. The Diffie–Hellman key exchange protocol allows key exchange over an insecure channel by electronically generating a shared key between two parties. On the other hand, RSA is a form of the asymmetric key system which consists of three steps: key generation, encryption, and decryption. Key confirmation delivers an assurance between the key confirmation recipient and provider that the shared keying materials are correct and established. The National Institute of Standards and Technology recommends key confirmation to be integrated into a key establishment scheme to validate its implementations. == Management == Key management concerns the generation, establishment, storage, usage and replacement of cryptographic keys. A key management system (KMS) typically includes three steps of establishing, storing and using keys. The base of security for the generation, storage, distribution, use and destruction of keys depends on successful key management protocols. == Key vs password == A password is a memorized series of characters including letters, digits, and other special symbols that are used to verify identity. It is often produced by a human user or a password management software to protect personal and sensitive information or generate cryptographic keys. Passwords are often created to be memorized by users and may contain non-random information such as dictionary words. On the other hand, a key can help strengthen password protection by implementing a cryptographic algorithm which is difficult to guess or replace the password altogether. A key is generated based on random or pseudo-random data and can often be unreadable to humans. A password is less safe than a cryptographic key due to its low entropy, randomness, and human-readable properties. However, the password may be the only secret data that is accessible to the cryptographic algorithm for information security in some applications such as securing information in storage devices. Thus, a deterministic algorithm called a key derivation function (KDF) uses a password to generate the secure cryptographic keying material to compensate for the password's weakness. Various methods such as adding a salt or key stretching may be used in the generation.

  Read more →
• 

  Service Assurance Agent

  IP SLA (Internet Protocol Service Level Agreement) is an active computer network measurement technology that was initially developed by Cisco Systems. IP SLA was previously known as Service Assurance Agent (SAA) or Response Time Reporter (RTR). IP SLA is used to track network performance like latency, ping response, and jitter, it also helps to provide service quality. == Functions == Routers and switches enabled with IP SLA perform periodic network tests or measurements such as Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) GET File Transfer Protocol (FTP) downloads Domain Name System (DNS) lookups User Datagram Protocol (UDP) echo, for VoIP jitter and mean opinion score (MOS) Data-Link Switching (DLSw) (Systems Network Architecture (SNA) tunneling protocol) Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) lease requests Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) connect Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo (remote ping) The exact number and types of available measurements depends on the IOS version. IP SLA is very widely used in service provider networks to generate time-based performance data. It is also used together with Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) and NetFlow, which generate volume-based data. == Usage considerations == For IP SLA tests, devices with IP SLA support are required. IP SLA is supported on Cisco routers and switches since IOS version 12.1. Other vendors like Juniper Networks or Enterasys Networks support IP SLA on some of their devices. IP SLA tests and data collection can be configured either via a console (command-line interface) or via SNMP. When using SNMP, both read and write community strings are needed. The IP SLA voice quality feature was added starting with IOS version 12.3(4)T. All versions after this, including 12.4 mainline, contain the MOS and ICPIF voice quality calculation for the UDP jitter measurement.

  Read more →
• 

  Data exhaust

  Data exhaust (also exhaust data) is the trail of data generated as a by-product of users' online activity, behaviour, and transactions, rather than data they deliberately create or submit. It forms part of a broader category of unconventional data that also includes geospatial, network, and time-series data, and may be useful for predictive analytics. Data exhaust can take the form of cookies, temporary files, log files, clickstream records and stored preferences. Actions such as visiting a web page, following a link, or dwelling on an element may all generate exhaust data that is recorded without the user's active awareness. Unlike primary content — which the user intentionally creates — exhaust data is a passive side effect of interaction. A bank, for example, might treat the amounts and parties involved in a transaction as primary data, while secondary data could include whether the transaction was carried out at a cash machine rather than a branch. == Uses == Data exhaust collected by companies is often information that is not immediately useful in isolation, but can be aggregated and analysed to improve products, personalise content, identify trends, and support quality control. Companies may also store exhaust data for future analysis or sell it to third parties. Shoshana Zuboff has described this practice as a core mechanism of what she terms surveillance capitalism, in which behavioural data generated by users is converted into predictive products. Kosciejew notes that large quantities of often raw data are collected in this way, much of which is never analysed. == Medical exhaust data == Many medical devices — including pacemakers, dialysis machines and surgical cameras — generate exhaust data as a by-product of their operation. The majority of this data is never captured or analysed, and is typically discarded once a procedure ends or a device completes its routine monitoring cycle. The potential use of data generated by implanted devices such as pacemakers raises additional legal and ethical questions around ownership and consent. Using electronic health records for research also creates challenges because of the volume of data involved, creating a need for automated algorithms to process it. == Privacy and regulation == The collection and distribution of data exhaust is not in itself illegal in most jurisdictions, but its use raises questions of privacy and informed consent. Steps commonly taken to address these concerns include data anonymisation, offering users an opt-out from the sale of their data, and publishing explicit privacy policies that disclose what data is collected and how it is used.

  Read more →
• 

  LMArena

  Arena (formerly LMArena and Chatbot Arena) is a public, web-based platform that evaluates large language models (LLMs). Users enter prompts for two anonymous models to respond to and vote on the model that gave the better response, after which the models' identities are revealed. Users can also choose models to test themselves via the "Direct" selection. Companies which have supplied the company with their large language models include OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic. The website has been used for preview releases of upcoming models. Chinese company DeepSeek tested its prototype models in the Arena months before its R1 model gained attention in Western media. Other notable pre-release models include OpenAI's GPT-5 under the codename "summit" and Google DeepMind's Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (an image-generation and editing model) under the codename "Nano Banana". Research has identified specific limitations in Arena's methodology. == History == Chatbot Arena was released on April 24, 2023. In June 2024, Chatbot Arena added image support. In September 2024, Chatbot Arena moved to its own dedicated domain name, lmarena.ai (or LMArena). In April 2025, Meta released Llama 4. Llama 4 Maverick beat GPT-4o and Gemini 2.0 Flash on LMArena, but the version of Maverick on LMArena unfairly differed from the publicly available version. LMArena updated their policies in response. In April 2025, LMArena incorporated as an independent company. That May, LMArena raised $100 million in a seed funding round, valuing the company at $600 million. Participants in the seed funding round included Andreessen Horowitz, UC Investments, Lightspeed Venture Partners, Felicis Ventures, and Kleiner Perkins. On January 6, 2026, LMArena announced the closing of a $150 million Series A funding round, bringing the company’s post-money valuation to approximately $1.7 billion. The round was led by Felicis and UC Investments (University of California), with participation from Andreessen Horowitz, The House Fund, LDVP, Kleiner Perkins, Lightspeed Venture Partners, and Laude Ventures. In January 2026, LMArena added video support. On January 28, 2026, LMArena rebranded to "Arena".

  Read more →
• 

  Unknown key-share attack

  As defined by Blake-Wilson & Menezes (1999), an unknown key-share (UKS) attack on an authenticated key agreement (AK) or authenticated key agreement with key confirmation (AKC) protocol is an attack whereby an entity A {\displaystyle A} ends up believing she shares a key with B {\displaystyle B} , and although this is in fact the case, B {\displaystyle B} mistakenly believes the key is instead shared with an entity E ≠ A {\displaystyle E\neq A} . In other words, in a UKS, an opponent, say Eve, coerces honest parties Alice and Bob into establishing a secret key where at least one of Alice and Bob does not know that the secret key is shared with the other. For example, Eve may coerce Bob into believing he shares the key with Eve, while he actually shares the key with Alice. The “key share” with Alice is thus unknown to Bob.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media use in African politics

  Since the Egyptian Revolution in 2011 and the Tunisian Revolution, social media, especially Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, began to gain traction as a political tool in Africa. Various political actors have used social media to pursue a wide range of political objectives. State actors can use social media to encourage political discourse, campaign, or implement censorship and surveillance. Non-state actors, such as civil society organizations and opposition movements, can use social media to address political concerns and to organize widespread uprisings, such as the 2014 Burkinabé uprising. Meanwhile, extremist organizations can use social media to further their propaganda and recruitment. However, social media has been criticized for its limited accessibility and for facilitating the spread of misinformation, causing some skepticism about its effectiveness. Due to low entry barriers and user-generated content, social media provides a platform where people from different social classes can engage and interact with one another. Under traditional media, the public had limited opportunities to voice their political opinions. Social media enables people to both create and consume content. The public has become increasingly comfortable and confident in expressing political opinions online, often away from government scrutiny. Scholars argue that social media use has democratizing effects in African countries. == State actors == === Promoting political discourse === Through social media, the government and its citizens can discuss policy ideas, policy implementation, and political actions. Regardless of geographical location and distance, people are able to voice their opinions to the government. Social media includes citizens who were previously not able to express their discontent or share their ideas to the government. As state actors keep the public informed, social media can increase civic engagement. With more civic engagement, policies can be discussed without politicization. Before the commonplace use of social media, African countries faced weak feedback mechanisms that effectively excluded the average African citizen from policy discourse. In South Africa, the government uses social media to connect with constituencies. The South African president runs an official Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Flickr accounts to engage with the public. === Campaigning === Political parties also use social media for political campaigns during election periods. In South Africa, the ANC (African National Congress) and DA (Democratic Alliance) use social media for political purposes. These parties specifically use Facebook as a tool for campaigning and engaging with the public to improve their relationship with citizens. Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan employed social media to campaign for the presidential election in 2011, which he won. When President Goodluck Jonathan announced his bid for the presidency on social media in 2010, it reached about 217,000 people. As his campaign progressed, President Goodluck Jonathan was able to increase his followers to half a million by early 2011. === Censorship & Surveillance === While state actors can use social media to encourage their party or discourse, social media can be used to censor and surveil citizens. For example, the ANC and DA use Facebook to monitor South Africans. The government is able to track down people who have spoken against the government and translate this information into physical action to stop any possibility of a revolution. Social media platforms can be shut down to manipulate the flow of information. In Chad, citizens cannot access information through online platforms. This censorship blocked "Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp and Viber". In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the government shut down the internet before contested elections. In Zimbabwe, the government shut down the internet to hide civilian protests against fuel price increases. == Non-state actors == === Civil society organizations (CSOs) === Civil society organizations have also used social media networks in an effort to recruit supporters and communicate with the public. CSOs can use social media to mobilize people to support their cause, such as the Ghanaian Committee for Joint Action (CJA). In 2005 and 2006, the CJA gathered support to protest against the 50% fuel price increase. CSOs can play the role of a counterforce against state actors and state propaganda during times of crises, such as protests and military clashes. In some cases, CSOs release their own videos and photos on social media which challenges traditional forms of media. CSOs have also served to monitor elections to reduce corruption and violence during election day. For instance, the Zambian Bantu Watch started the #bantuwatch social media campaign to monitor the 2011 presidential election. Zambians used Facebook and Twitter to report polling station results to mitigate election fraud and election violence. In South Africa, CSOs created 'amandla.mobi' to campaign for public policies by creating petitions. Through 'amandla.mobi', CSOs are able to circulate petitions on social media to collect signatures. South African CSOs reported how social media helped their organizations to gain support and share ideas. However, CSOs struggle to attract media attention and often have to pay for media coverage. === Opposition forces against the government === Social media is also used by the public or opposition forces against the government. Through horizontal social media, organizing can lead to street protests and revolutions, some of which are successful. For instance, during the Egyptian revolution of 2011, "The Day of the Revolution Against Torture, Poverty, Corruption, and Unemployment" and "We Are All Khaled Said" gathered support against President Hosni Mubarak. In particular, "We Are All Khaled Said" had Egyptian citizens gather around the death of Khaled Said who was brutally tortured and killed by the Egyptian government because Said wanted to uncover government corruption. As unrest erupted into public demonstrations, President Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign. Witnessing the success of social media during the Egyptian revolution, the Tunisian Revolution, or the Jasmine Revolution, mobilized through Facebook and Twitter. Likewise, in South Africa, Malawi, and Mozambique, these countries have used social media as "new protest drums." Due to social media's low entry barrier, opposition forces against the government can facilitate political discourse that can lead to accountability. Whistleblowers and opposition forces are able to expose corruption through social media, where they face less repression while reaching a larger audience. For example, the youth of Zimbabwe and South Africa use Facebook to discuss politics without judgment. Specifically, in Zimbabwe, political youth used Facebook to avoid state surveillance. Social media is used as a supplemental tool for activism. In 2015, South African student activists started the hashtag #RhodesMustFall to push the issue of colonialism and racism at the forefront of the public. === Extremist organizations === Social media is easily accessible and created by user-based content. Therefore, marginalized groups are able to use social media to spread extremist ideas. For instance, Boko Haram created the Media Office of West Africa Province and perpetuated propaganda through Twitter and YouTube. Boko Haram's online propaganda campaign targets and persuades young dissuaded Nigerians to join their cause. It is important to note that social media has also been used against Boko Haram. In April 2014, Boko Haram kidnapped 276 schoolgirls and an international campaign fought for their return through #BringBackOurGirls. Another extremist group, Al-Shabaab, has created an online presence through Twitter and YouTube. Through these social media networks, Al-Shabaab recruits new members to their extremist group through their propaganda which emphasizes the group's successes. Albeit their efforts, Al-Shabaab has not been very successful in coordinating their members but they are successful in financing their group. Furthermore, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) use social media to target and recruit individuals to their cause. ISIL's social media usage is more diverse compared to Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab; ISIL uses "Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, WhatsApp, Telegram, JustPaste.it, Kik and Ask.fm." Since ISIL's Twitter accounts kept getting shut down, ISIL uses Telegram and WhatsApp chat rooms to privately conduct meetings. Due to the spread of extremist ideology, Zhuravskaya et al. acknowledge social media's potential to be misused. == Challenges == Although social media can be used as a political tool, it faces challenges in Africa. Due to low literacy rates in Africa, social media networks exclude many of the population members. In addition, lack of access to electricity and the internet can fur

  Read more →
• 

  Serge Belamant

  Serge Belamant (born 1953) is a French-born South African entrepreneur best known for designing the Universal Electronic Payment System (UEPS) and the Chip Offline Pre-authorised Card (COPAC). He founded the cash-payments company Net1 UEPS Technologies in 1989, led it through dual listings on the NASDAQ and the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, and oversaw the contentious welfare-payments contract with the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) until his retirement in 2017. Since 2018 he has been non-executive chair of London-based buy-now-pay-later fintech Zilch. == Early life and education == Belamant moved from France to South Africa with his family in 1967 and matriculated from Highlands North Boys' High School, Johannesburg. In 1972 he entered the University of the Witwatersrand to study civil engineering but switched to computer science and applied mathematics in his second year. He left the university without a degree and later took short courses in information systems at the University of South Africa (UNISA). == Early career and SASWITCH (1981–1989) == Belamant worked for Control Data Corporation as a systems analyst for a decade before joining SASWITCH Ltd in 1985. Economic sanctions had left the consortium's national ATM network dependent on unsupported Christian Rovsing computers. Belamant led a rebuild on fault-tolerant Stratus hardware and wrote protocol-translation software that allowed fourteen banks to connect without altering their host systems. By 1988 SASWITCH was handling about three million ATM transactions a month, according to the Competition Commission. The switch—now run by BankservAfrica—remains the backbone of South Africa's shared ATM network. == Net1 UEPS Technologies (1989–2017) == === Founding and UEPS === In 1989, Serge Belamant developed the Universal Electronic Payment System (UEPS), enabling secure, real-time transactions even in areas with limited connectivity. In the same year, he founded NET1 UEPS Technologies Inc., serving as its CEO and Director. === COPAC for VISA === In 1995, VISA tasked Belamant with designing the Chip Offline Pre-authorized Card (COPAC), a technology still widely used in chip-enabled credit and debit cards. A year later, he listed his company APLITEC (Applied Technology Holdings Limited) on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. === Listings and acquisitions === In 1999, Belamant acquired Cash Payment Services (CPS) from First National Bank of South Africa, modernizing its welfare payment system to serve millions in rural areas. In 2005, he led NET1 Technologies to an IPO, listing it as NET1 UEPS Technologies Inc. on the Nasdaq. A secondary listing on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) followed in 2008. === SASSA contract === Under Belamant's leadership, NET1 managed welfare payments for the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA), handling payments for over 10 million beneficiaries monthly. Despite criticism over handling the SASSA contract, investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice and the South African Constitutional Court found no wrongdoing. == Zilch (2018–present) == Belamant co-founded London-based "buy-now-pay-later" firm Zilch Technology in 2018 and serves as non-executive chair. Zilch reported £145 million in annual-recurring revenue and 4.5 million customers in January 2025. == Patents == Belamant is listed as inventor on more than a dozen payment-security patents, including: "Funds transfer system" (US RE36,788, 2000) – the basis for UEPS. "Financial transactions with a varying PIN" (WO 2014/037869, 2014).

  Read more →
• 

  Kubity

  Kubity is a cloud-based 3D communication tool that works on desktop computers, the web, smartphones, tablets, augmented reality gear, and virtual reality glasses. Kubity is powered by several proprietary 3D processing engines including "Paragone" and "Etna" that prepare the 3D file for transfer over mobile devices. Kubity has practical applications for architecture, interior design, engineering, product design, film, and video games among others. The majority of its users create 3D models using SketchUp or Autodesk Revit software. Kubity products include the Kubity web app and Kubity Go (a mobile application for iOS and Android). Kubity is compatible across many platforms, devices and operating systems including: iOS, Android, Firefox, Chrome, Windows, MacOS, and Linux. == History == Kubity was created by SPK Technology (ex Kubity S.A.S.), a Paris-based software company specializing in automatic 3D data optimization and visualization. Founded in 2012 by a group of software engineers and an urban projects developer, they united around a simple idea: create a way for anyone, anywhere to simply and intuitively explore 3D models on smartphones and computers. In order to bring architects, engineers and designers together with their clients around a 3D model, it was essential to develop an interactive platform that supported multiple desktop and mobile devices for instantaneous and fluid 3D navigation. With specifications in place, 15 engineers fused together several technologies: 3D design, data compression, decimation and rendering optimization, web and mobile transfer, and virtual reality headset integration. In January 2014, the first public Kubity prototype (1.0 Amethyst) was launched to a small group of beta testers with a plug-in that allowed users to import 3D models from SketchUp to their browser. A global release was announced in April 2014 at the SketchUp Basecamp in Vail, Colorado. In May 2015, Kubity launched a web application that worked using WebGL technology (2.0 Citrine). For the first time, users were able to drag and drop any SketchUp file in a web browser without having to install a plug-in. In December 2015, Kubity launched a mobile application on the App Store for iPhone, iPod, and iPad as well as on Google Play for Android devices (3.0 Druzy). In November 2016, Kubity launched support for Oculus Rift and HTC Vive (4.0 Emerald). Beginning in November 2017, Kubity launched a full suite rollout of mobile applications over six months that included Kubity AR for augmented reality, Kubity VR for virtual reality, and Kubity Mirror for remote presentations and screen mirroring (5.0 Feldspar). In September 2018, a one-click plugin for SketchUp and Revit (Kubity PRO), along with a mobile-first revamp of Kubity Go was launched, allowing PRO-to-Go device pairing for automatic mobile sync (6.0 Gypsum). In early 2019, the Kubity Go application was updated to include fully integrated AR, VR, and screen mirroring functionalities, killing off the dedicated companion apps Kubity AR, Kubity VR and Kubity Mirror in the process (7.0 Heliotrope). In January 2020, support for the Kubity PRO plugin for SketchUp and Revit was migrated to a SketchUp-only web app. == Technology == Kubity is powered by a proprietary 3D crystallization engine known as "Paragone"; a technology developed by SPK Technology. Paragone takes constrained information from a 3D file and runs it through the "BlockWave" algorithm (US Patent 10,482.629), also developed by SPK Technology. BlockWave is a multiphase optimization algorithm that combines 3D design, data compression, decimation and rendering optimization, web and mobile transfer, and mixed reality headset integration to create a crystallized universal format of the original file. One phase of the BlockWave algorithm is based on the quadric-based polygonal surface simplification algorithm, performed using predefined heuristics, and is associated with a plurality of simplified versions of the 3D model, each version being associated with a predefined level of detail adapted to the user specific end device. BlockWave extracts data content, geometry and textures, then sets quadrics for each top of the original 3D model, and identifies pairs of adjacent tops linked by vertices. The algorithm uses a local collapsing operator and a top-plan error metric to obtain a fixed number of faces or a maximum defined error; 3D meshing is simplified by replacing two points with one, then deleting the degrading faces and updating adjacent relations. Once decimation is completed, texture optimization is set using texture target parameters allowing maximized GPU memory to improve computing time. With texture encoding completed, the crystallized universal 3D file can now be easily opened on any user-specific end device and played across most digital devices with real-time rendering. == Features == === 3D Crystallization === A user converts (or crystallizes) a 3D file by exporting it with the Kubity web app. Crystallization adds features like AR/VR and cinematic fly-through tour as well as assigns the model a dedicated QR code. === Automatic Mobile Sync === When a 3D model is exported, it is automatically synced to Kubity Go on the user's mobile device. From there, it can be accessed, explored, and shared with others with or without an internet connection. === Security and Management === User models can be managed all in one place on Kubity Go or in a browser from their account. Models can be renamed, password-protected, shared, and played. === Augmented Reality === Developed using Apple ARKit and Google ARCore technology, Kubity Go's augmented reality feature maps the environment in a room detecting horizontal planes like tables and floors to track and place 3D objects. By blending digital objects and information with the environment, Kubity allows users to interact with 3D models in true augmented reality. Built-in communication features allows users to instantly share 3D models with anyone over text, email, social media, or direct device-to-device with a QR Code. Platform Support AR supports devices running iOS11 including: iPhone SE, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone X, all iPad Pro models, and iPad (2017). AR for Android requires Android 7.0 or later and access to the Google Play Store. === Virtual Reality === VR allows users to explore SketchUp models and Revit projects on-the-go right from a mobile device using Oculus Go, Google Cardboard, Samsung Gear VR, or the glasses-free Magic Window feature. Kubity's virtual reality feature is compatible with Oculus Go, Google Cardboard viewers and other cardboard compatible devices including clip-on style VR glasses like Homido Mini, as well as the mobile virtual reality headset, Samsung Gear VR. Samsung Gear VR supports: Galaxy S6, Galaxy S6 Edge, Galaxy S6 Edge+, Samsung Galaxy Note 5, Galaxy S7, Galaxy S7 Edge, Galaxy S8, Galaxy S8+, Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, Samsung Galaxy Note 8, Samsung Galaxy A8/A8+ (2018), and Samsung Galaxy S9/Galaxy S9+. === Screen Mirroring === Screen mirroring allows a user to sync the sender device to a receiver on a webpage, then control from the sender device to give a remote presentation of the 3D model. Devices are easily synced by entering a six-digit number displayed on the receiving computer. == Platform support == On iOS, the Kubity application is compatible with devices running on the version 9.0 or higher. On Android, Kubity is compatible with devices running on the version 4.4 “Kit Kat” or higher. The web version of Kubity applications currently support web browsers compatible with WebGL2 : Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. AR is compatible with devices running iOS11 including: iPhone SE, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone X, all iPad Pro models, and iPad (2017), and Android devices. Requires Android 7.0 or later and access to the Google Play Store. VR is compatible with Google Cardboard viewers and other cardboard compatible devices including clip-on style VR glasses like Homido Mini, as well as the Samsung Gear VR and Oculus Go. Samsung Gear VR supports: Galaxy S6, Galaxy S6 Edge, Galaxy S6 Edge+, Samsung Galaxy Note 5, Galaxy S7, Galaxy S7 Edge, Galaxy S8, Galaxy S8+, Samsung Galaxy Note Fan Edition, Samsung Galaxy Note 8, Samsung Galaxy A8/A8+ (2018) and Samsung Galaxy S9/Galaxy S9+.

  Read more →
• 

  Chunked transfer encoding

  Chunked transfer encoding is a streaming data transfer mechanism available in Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) version 1.1, defined in RFC 9112 §7.1. In chunked transfer encoding, the data stream is divided into a series of non-overlapping "chunks". The chunks are sent out and received independently of one another. At any given time, no knowledge of the data stream outside the currently-being-processed chunk is necessary for either the sender or the receiver. Each chunk is preceded by its size in bytes and transmission ends when a zero-length chunk is received. The chunked keyword in the Transfer-Encoding header is used to indicate chunked transfer. Chunked transfer encoding is not supported in HTTP/2, which provides its own mechanisms for data streaming. == Rationale == The introduction of chunked encoding provided various benefits: Chunked transfer encoding allows a server to maintain an HTTP persistent connection for dynamically generated content. In this case, the HTTP Content-Length header cannot be used to delimit the content and the next HTTP request/response, as the content size is not yet known. Chunked encoding has the benefit that it is not necessary to generate the full content before writing the header, as it allows streaming of content as chunks and explicitly signaling the end of the content, making the connection available for the next HTTP request/response. Chunked encoding allows the sender to send additional header fields after the message body. This is important in cases where values of a field cannot be known until the content has been produced, such as when the content of the message must be digitally signed. Without chunked encoding, the sender would have to buffer the content until it was complete in order to calculate a field value and send it before the content. == Applicability == For version 1.1 of the HTTP protocol, the chunked transfer mechanism is considered to be always and anyway acceptable, even if not listed in the Transfer-Encoding (TE) request header field, and when used with other transfer mechanisms, should always be applied last to the transferred data and never more than one time. This transfer encoding method also allows additional entity header fields to be sent after the last chunk if the client specified the "trailers" parameter as an argument of the TE request field. The origin server of the response can also decide to send additional entity trailers even if the client did not specify the "trailers" parameter, but only if the metadata is optional (i.e. the client can use the received entity without them). Whenever the trailers are used, the server should list their names in the Trailer header field; three header field types are specifically prohibited from appearing as a trailer field: Content-Length, Trailer, and Transfer-Encoding. == Format == If a Transfer-Encoding field with a value of "chunked" is specified in an HTTP message (either a request sent by a client or the response from the server), the body of the message consists of one or more chunks and one terminating chunk with an optional trailer before the final ␍␊ sequence (i.e. carriage return followed by line feed). Each chunk starts with the number of octets of the data it embeds expressed as a hexadecimal number in ASCII followed by optional parameters (chunk extension) and a terminating ␍␊ sequence, followed by the chunk data. The chunk is terminated by ␍␊. If chunk extensions are provided, the chunk size is terminated by a semicolon and followed by the parameters, each also delimited by semicolons. Each parameter is encoded as an extension name followed by an optional equal sign and value. These parameters could be used for a running message digest or digital signature, or to indicate an estimated transfer progress, for instance. The terminating chunk is a special chunk of zero length. It may contain a trailer, which consists of a (possibly empty) sequence of entity header fields. Normally, such header fields would be sent in the message's header; however, it may be more efficient to determine them after processing the entire message entity. In that case, it is useful to send those headers in the trailer. Header fields that regulate the use of trailers are Transfer-Encoding with the "trailers" parameter (used in requests) and Trailer (used in responses). == Use with compression == HTTP servers often use compression to optimize transmission, for example with Content-Encoding: gzip or Content-Encoding: deflate. If both compression and chunked encoding are enabled, then the content stream is first compressed, then chunked; so the chunk encoding itself is not compressed, and the data in each chunk is compressed holistically (i.e. based on the whole content). The remote endpoint then decodes the stream by concatenating the chunks and uncompressing the result. == Example == === Encoded data === The following example contains three chunks of size 4, 7, and 11 (hexadecimal "B") octets of data. 4␍␊Wiki␍␊7␍␊pedia i␍␊B␍␊n ␍␊chunks.␍␊0␍␊␍␊ Below is an annotated version of the encoded data. 4␍␊ (chunk size is four octets) Wiki (four octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) 7␍␊ (chunk size is seven octets) pedia i (seven octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) B␍␊ (chunk size is eleven octets) n ␍␊chunks. (eleven octets of data) ␍␊ (end of chunk) 0␍␊ (chunk size is zero octets, no more chunks) ␍␊ (end of final chunk with zero data octets) Note: Each chunk's size excludes the two ␍␊ bytes that terminate the data of each chunk. === Decoded data === Decoding the above example produces the following octets: Wikipedia in ␍␊chunks. The bytes above are typically displayed as Wikipedia in chunks.

  Read more →
• 

  Data Reference Model

  The Data Reference Model (DRM) is one of the five reference models of the Federal Enterprise Architecture. == Overview == The DRM is a framework whose primary purpose is to enable information sharing and reuse across the United States federal government via the standard description and discovery of common data and the promotion of uniform data management practices. The DRM describes artifacts which can be generated from the data architectures of federal government agencies. The DRM provides a flexible and standards-based approach to accomplish its purpose. The scope of the DRM is broad, as it may be applied within a single agency, within a community of interest, or cross-community of interest. == Data Reference Model topics == === DRM structure === The DRM provides a standard means by which data may be described, categorized, and shared. These are reflected within each of the DRM's three standardization areas: Data Description: Provides a means to uniformly describe data, thereby supporting its discovery and sharing. Data Context: Facilitates discovery of data through an approach to the categorization of data according to taxonomies. Additionally, enables the definition of authoritative data assets within a community of interest. Data Sharing: Supports the access and exchange of data where access consists of ad hoc requests (such as a query of a data asset), and exchange consists of fixed, re-occurring transactions between parties. Enabled by capabilities provided by both the Data Context and Data Description standardization areas. === DRM Version 2 === The Data Reference Model version 2 released in November 2005 is a 114-page document with detailed architectural diagrams and an extensive glossary of terms. The DRM also make many references to ISO standards specifically the ISO/IEC 11179 metadata registry standard. === DRM usage === The DRM is not technically a published technical interoperability standard such as web services, it is an excellent starting point for data architects within federal and state agencies. Any federal or state agencies that are involved with exchanging information with other agencies or that are involved in data warehousing efforts should use this document as a guide.

  Read more →
• 

  Sysomos

  Sysomos Inc. is a Toronto-based social media analytics company owned by Outside Insight market leaders Meltwater. The company developed text analytics and machine learning technologies for user generated content, and served 80% of the top agencies and Fortune 500. == History == Sysomos was founded by Nilesh Bansal and Nick Koudas. The company is a spinoff of the University of Toronto research project BlogScope. The BlogScope project, which started in 2005, resulted in creation of the underlying content aggregation and analysis engine commercialized by Sysomos. The company raised venture capital in 2008 and was acquired by Marketwire in 2010. The company's original flagship product, Media Analysis Platform (MAP), mines and analyzes content from social media or user-generated content to create a picture of media coverage. Sysomos launched its flagship offering MAP in Sept 2007, followed by addition of Heartbeat to its product suite in 2009. In addition to the two main products, the company released FourWhere, a free location-based social search service that mashes up Foursquare in March 2010. The company also offers Sysomos Heartbeat which provides social media monitoring and engagement capabilities to communication professionals, brand managers and customer support groups. In 2013, Heartbeat was extended to add publishing components to deliver a complete end-to-end social media marketing platform. On July 6, 2010, it was announced that Marketwire, a press release distribution company, had acquired Sysomos. After the acquisition, Sysomos founders Nick Koudas and Nilesh Bansal, left Sysomos to start Aislelabs. In February 2015, Sysomos split from Marketwired, as an independent company, and appointed Adnan Ahmed as the new CEO. In March 2015, newly independent Sysomos launched a redesign for its Heartbeat product and a new API for its MAP product. In the same year, the company acquired Expion. In September 2016, Peter Heffring was announced as the new CEO. In April 2017, Sysomos showcased a new unified platform offering new insights. In April 2018, media monitoring firm Meltwater announced it had acquired Sysomos. The CEO of Sysomos, Peter Heffring, said the company will continue to operate as an independent unit of Meltwater. Heffring will run the social analytics division of Meltwater. == Reports == Inside Twitter series of reports is the most extensive third-party survey on Twitter's growth and demographics. Another extensive survey regarding the top 5% of most active Twitter users found that over 25% of all tweets are machine created. The report also confirms Twitter's international growth. Inside Facebook Pages report found that only four percent of pages have more than 10,000 fans, 0.76% of pages have more than 100,000 fans, and 0.05% of pages (or 297 in total) have more than a million fans. Inside YouTube reports focus more on video hosting services and YouTube.

  Read more →
• 

  Language model benchmark

  A language model benchmark is a standardized test designed to evaluate the performance of language models on various natural language processing tasks. These tests are intended for comparing different models' capabilities in areas such as language understanding, generation, and reasoning. Benchmarks generally consist of a dataset and corresponding evaluation metrics. The dataset provides text samples and annotations, while the metrics measure a model's performance on tasks like answering questions, text classification, and machine translation. These benchmarks are developed and maintained by academic institutions, research organizations, and industry players to track progress in the field. In addition to accuracy, the metrics can include throughput, energy efficiency, bias, trust, and sustainability. == Overview == === Types === Benchmarks may be described by the following adjectives, not mutually exclusive: Classical: These tasks are studied in natural language processing, even before the advent of deep learning. Examples include the Penn Treebank for testing syntactic and semantic parsing, as well as bilingual translation benchmarked by BLEU scores. Question answering: These tasks have a text question and a text answer, often multiple-choice. They can be open-book or closed-book. Open-book QA resembles reading comprehension questions, with relevant passages included as annotation in the question, in which the answer appears. Closed-book QA includes no relevant passages. Closed-book QA is also called open-domain question-answering. Before the era of large language models, open-book QA was more common, and understood as testing information retrieval methods. Closed-book QA became common since GPT-2 as a method to measure knowledge stored within model parameters. Omnibus: An omnibus benchmark combines many benchmarks, often previously published. It is intended as an all-in-one benchmarking solution. Reasoning: These tasks are usually in the question-answering format, but are intended to be more difficult than standard question answering. Multimodal: These tasks require processing not only text, but also other modalities, such as images and sound. Examples include OCR and transcription. Agency: These tasks are for a language-model–based software agent that operates a computer for a user, such as editing images, browsing the web, etc. Adversarial: A benchmark is "adversarial" if the items in the benchmark are picked specifically so that certain models do badly on them. Adversarial benchmarks are often constructed after state of the art (SOTA) models have saturated (achieved 100% performance) a benchmark, to renew the benchmark. A benchmark is "adversarial" only at a certain moment in time, since what is adversarial may cease to be adversarial as newer SOTA models appear. Public/Private: A benchmark might be partly or entirely private, meaning that some or all of the questions are not publicly available. The idea is that if a question is publicly available, then it might be used for training, which would be "training on the test set" and invalidate the result of the benchmark. Usually, only the guardians of the benchmark have access to the private subsets, and to score a model on such a benchmark, one must send the model weights, or provide API access, to the guardians. The boundary between a benchmark and a dataset is not sharp. Generally, a dataset contains three "splits": training, test, and validation. Both the test and validation splits are essentially benchmarks. In general, a benchmark is distinguished from a test/validation dataset in that a benchmark is typically intended to be used to measure the performance of many different models that are not trained specifically for doing well on the benchmark, while a test/validation set is intended to be used to measure the performance of models trained specifically on the corresponding training set. In other words, a benchmark may be thought of as a test/validation set without a corresponding training set. Conversely, certain benchmarks may be used as a training set, such as the English Gigaword or the One Billion Word Benchmark, which in modern language is just the negative log-likelihood loss on a pretraining set with 1 billion words. Indeed, the distinction between benchmark and dataset in language models became sharper after the rise of the pretraining paradigm, whereby a model is first trained on massive, unlabeled datasets to learn general language patterns, syntax, and knowledge (pretraining), and the base model is then adapted to specific, downstream tasks using smaller, labeled datasets (fine-tuning). === Lifecycle === Generally, the life cycle of a benchmark consists of the following steps: Inception: A benchmark is published. It can be simply given as a demonstration of the power of a new model (implicitly) that others then picked up as a benchmark, or as a benchmark that others are encouraged to use (explicitly). Growth: More papers and models use the benchmark, and the performance on the benchmark grows. Maturity, degeneration or deprecation: A benchmark may be saturated, after which researchers move on to other benchmarks. Progress on the benchmark may also be neglected as the field moves to focus on other benchmarks. Renewal: A saturated benchmark can be upgraded to make it no longer saturated, allowing further progress. === Construction === Like datasets, benchmarks are typically constructed by several methods, individually or in combination: Web scraping: Ready-made question-answer pairs may be scraped online, such as from websites that teach mathematics and programming. Conversion: Items may be constructed programmatically from scraped web content, such as by blanking out named entities from sentences, and asking the model to fill in the blank. This was used for making the CNN/Daily Mail Reading Comprehension Task. Crowd sourcing: Items may be constructed by paying people to write them, such as on Amazon Mechanical Turk. This was used for making the MCTest. === Evaluation === Generally, benchmarks are fully automated. This limits the questions that can be asked. For example, with mathematical questions, "proving a claim" would be difficult to automatically check, while "calculate an answer with a unique integer answer" would be automatically checkable. With programming tasks, the answer can generally be checked by running unit tests, with an upper limit on runtime. The benchmark scores are of the following kinds: For multiple choice or cloze questions, common scores are accuracy (frequency of correct answer), precision, recall, F1 score, etc. pass@n: The model is given n {\displaystyle n} attempts to solve each problem. If any attempt is correct, the model earns a point. The pass@n score is the model's average score over all problems. k@n: The model makes n {\displaystyle n} attempts to solve each problem, but only k {\displaystyle k} attempts out of them are selected for submission. If any submission is correct, the model earns a point. The k@n score is the model's average score over all problems. cons@n: The model is given n {\displaystyle n} attempts to solve each problem. If the most common answer is correct, the model earns a point. The cons@n score is the model's average score over all problems. Here "cons" stands for "consensus" or "majority voting". The pass@n score can be estimated more accurately by making N > n {\displaystyle N>n} attempts, and use the unbiased estimator 1 − ( N − c n ) ( N n ) {\displaystyle 1-{\frac {\binom {N-c}{n}}{\binom {N}{n}}}} , where c {\displaystyle c} is the number of correct attempts. For less well-formed tasks, where the output can be any sentence, there are the following commonly used scores including BLEU ROUGE, METEOR, NIST, word error rate, LEPOR, CIDEr, and SPICE. === Issues === error: Some benchmark answers may be wrong. ambiguity: Some benchmark questions may be ambiguously worded. subjective: Some benchmark questions may not have an objective answer at all. This problem generally prevents creative writing benchmarks. Similarly, this prevents benchmarking writing proofs in natural language, though benchmarking proofs in a formal language is possible. open-ended: Some benchmark questions may not have a single answer of a fixed size. This problem generally prevents programming benchmarks from using more natural tasks such as "write a program for X", and instead uses tasks such as "write a function that implements specification X". inter-annotator agreement: Some benchmark questions may be not fully objective, such that even people would not agree with 100% on what the answer should be. This is common in natural language processing tasks, such as syntactic annotation. shortcut: Some benchmark questions may be easily solved by an "unintended" shortcut. For example, in the SNLI benchmark, having a negative word like "not" in the second sentence is a strong signal for the "Contradiction" category, regardless of what the se

  Read more →
• 

  Malleability (cryptography)

  Malleability is a property of some cryptographic algorithms. An encryption algorithm is said to be malleable if it is possible to transform a ciphertext into another ciphertext which decrypts to a related plaintext. That is, given an encryption of a plaintext m {\displaystyle m} , it is possible to generate another ciphertext which decrypts to f ( m ) {\displaystyle f(m)} , for a known function f {\displaystyle f} , without necessarily knowing or learning m {\displaystyle m} . Malleability is often an undesirable property in a general-purpose cryptosystem, since it allows an attacker to modify the contents of a message. For example, suppose that a bank uses a stream cipher to hide its financial information, and a user sends an encrypted message containing, say, "TRANSFER $0000100.00 TO ACCOUNT #199." If an attacker can modify the message on the wire, and can guess the format of the unencrypted message, the attacker could change the amount of the transaction, or the recipient of the funds, e.g. "TRANSFER $0100000.00 TO ACCOUNT #227". Malleability does not refer to the attacker's ability to read the encrypted message. Both before and after tampering, the attacker cannot read the encrypted message. On the other hand, some cryptosystems are malleable by design. In other words, in some circumstances it may be viewed as a feature that anyone can transform an encryption of m {\displaystyle m} into a valid encryption of f ( m ) {\displaystyle f(m)} (for some restricted class of functions f {\displaystyle f} ) without necessarily learning m {\displaystyle m} . Such schemes are known as homomorphic encryption schemes. A cryptosystem may be semantically secure against chosen-plaintext attacks or even non-adaptive chosen-ciphertext attacks (CCA1) while still being malleable. However, security against adaptive chosen-ciphertext attacks (CCA2) is equivalent to non-malleability. == Example malleable cryptosystems == In a stream cipher, the ciphertext is produced by taking the exclusive or of the plaintext and a pseudorandom stream based on a secret key k {\displaystyle k} , as E ( m ) = m ⊕ S ( k ) {\displaystyle E(m)=m\oplus S(k)} . An adversary can construct an encryption of m ⊕ t {\displaystyle m\oplus t} for any t {\displaystyle t} , as E ( m ) ⊕ t = m ⊕ t ⊕ S ( k ) = E ( m ⊕ t ) {\displaystyle E(m)\oplus t=m\oplus t\oplus S(k)=E(m\oplus t)} . In the RSA cryptosystem, a plaintext m {\displaystyle m} is encrypted as E ( m ) = m e mod n {\displaystyle E(m)=m^{e}{\bmod {n}}} , where ( e , n ) {\displaystyle (e,n)} is the public key. Given such a ciphertext, an adversary can construct an encryption of m t {\displaystyle mt} for any t {\displaystyle t} , as E ( m ) ⋅ t e mod n = ( m t ) e mod n = E ( m t ) {\textstyle E(m)\cdot t^{e}{\bmod {n}}=(mt)^{e}{\bmod {n}}=E(mt)} . For this reason, RSA is commonly used together with padding methods such as OAEP or PKCS1. In the ElGamal cryptosystem, a plaintext m {\displaystyle m} is encrypted as E ( m ) = ( g b , m A b ) {\displaystyle E(m)=(g^{b},mA^{b})} , where ( g , A ) {\displaystyle (g,A)} is the public key. Given such a ciphertext ( c 1 , c 2 ) {\displaystyle (c_{1},c_{2})} , an adversary can compute ( c 1 , t ⋅ c 2 ) {\displaystyle (c_{1},t\cdot c_{2})} , which is a valid encryption of t m {\displaystyle tm} , for any t {\displaystyle t} . In contrast, the Cramer-Shoup system (which is based on ElGamal) is not malleable. In the Paillier, ElGamal, and RSA cryptosystems, it is also possible to combine several ciphertexts together in a useful way to produce a related ciphertext. In Paillier, given only the public key and an encryption of m 1 {\displaystyle m_{1}} and m 2 {\displaystyle m_{2}} , one can compute a valid encryption of their sum m 1 + m 2 {\displaystyle m_{1}+m_{2}} . In ElGamal and in RSA, one can combine encryptions of m 1 {\displaystyle m_{1}} and m 2 {\displaystyle m_{2}} to obtain a valid encryption of their product m 1 m 2 {\displaystyle m_{1}m_{2}} . Block ciphers in the cipher block chaining mode of operation, for example, are partly malleable: flipping a bit in a ciphertext block will completely mangle the plaintext it decrypts to, but will result in the same bit being flipped in the plaintext of the next block. This allows an attacker to 'sacrifice' one block of plaintext in order to change some data in the next one, possibly managing to maliciously alter the message. This is essentially the core idea of the padding oracle attack on CBC, which allows the attacker to decrypt almost an entire ciphertext without knowing the key. For this and many other reasons, a message authentication code is required to guard against any method of tampering. == Complete non-malleability == Fischlin, in 2005, defined the notion of complete non-malleability as the ability of the system to remain non-malleable while giving the adversary additional power to choose a new public key which could be a function of the original public key. In other words, the adversary shouldn't be able to come up with a ciphertext whose underlying plaintext is related to the original message through a relation that also takes public keys into account.

  Read more →
• 

  Ultra (cryptography)

  Ultra was the designation adopted by British military intelligence in June 1941 for wartime signals intelligence obtained by breaking high-level encrypted enemy radio and teleprinter communications at the Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS) at Bletchley Park. Ultra eventually became the standard designation among the western Allies for all such intelligence. The name arose because the intelligence obtained was considered more important than that designated by the highest British security classification then used (Most Secret) and so was regarded as being Ultra Secret. Several other cryptonyms had been used for such intelligence. The code name "Boniface" was used as a cover name for Ultra. In order to ensure that the successful code-breaking did not become apparent to the Germans, British intelligence created a fictional MI6 master spy, Boniface, who controlled a fictional series of agents throughout Germany. Information obtained through code-breaking was often attributed to the human intelligence from the Boniface network. The U.S. used the codename Magic for its decrypts from Japanese sources, including the "Purple" cipher. Much of the German cipher traffic was encrypted on the Enigma machine. Used properly, the German military Enigma would have been virtually unbreakable; in practice, shortcomings in operation allowed it to be broken. The term "Ultra" has often been used almost synonymously with "Enigma decrypts". However, Ultra also encompassed decrypts of the German Lorenz SZ 40/42 machines that were used by the German High Command, and the Hagelin machine. Many observers, at the time and later, regarded Ultra as immensely valuable to the Allies. Winston Churchill was reported to have told King George VI, when presenting to him Stewart Menzies (head of the Secret Intelligence Service and the person who controlled distribution of Ultra decrypts to the government): "It is thanks to the secret weapon of General Menzies, put into use on all the fronts, that we won the war!" F. W. Winterbotham quoted the western Supreme Allied Commander, Dwight D. Eisenhower, at war's end describing Ultra as having been "decisive" to Allied victory. Sir Harry Hinsley, Bletchley Park veteran and official historian of British Intelligence in World War II, made a similar assessment of Ultra, saying that while the Allies would have won the war without it, "the war would have been something like two years longer, perhaps three years longer, possibly four years longer than it was." However, Hinsley and others have emphasized the difficulties of counterfactual history in attempting such conclusions, and some historians, such as John Keegan, have said the shortening might have been as little as the three months it took the United States to deploy the atomic bomb. == Sources of intelligence == Most Ultra intelligence was derived from reading radio messages that had been encrypted with cipher machines, complemented by material from radio communications using traffic analysis and direction finding. In the early phases of the war, particularly during the eight-month Phoney War, the Germans could transmit most of their messages using land lines and so had no need to use radio. This meant that those at Bletchley Park had some time to build up experience of collecting and starting to decrypt messages on the various radio networks. German Enigma messages were the main source, with those of the German air force (the Luftwaffe) predominating, as they used radio more and their operators were particularly ill-disciplined. === German === ==== Enigma ==== "Enigma" refers to a family of electro-mechanical rotor cipher machines. These produced a polyalphabetic substitution cipher and were widely thought to be unbreakable in the 1920s, when a variant of the commercial Model D was first used by the Reichswehr. The German Army (Heer), Navy, Air Force, Nazi party, Gestapo and German diplomats used Enigma machines in several variants. Abwehr (German military intelligence) used a four-rotor machine without a plugboard and Naval Enigma used different key management from that of the army or air force, making its traffic far more difficult to cryptanalyse; each variant required different cryptanalytic treatment. The commercial versions were not as secure and Dilly Knox of GC&CS is said to have broken one before the war. German military Enigma was first broken in December 1932 by Marian Rejewski and the Polish Cipher Bureau, using a combination of brilliant mathematics, the services of a spy in the German office responsible for administering encrypted communications, and good luck. The Poles read Enigma to the outbreak of World War II and beyond, in France. At the turn of 1939, the Germans made the systems ten times more complex, which required a tenfold increase in Polish decryption equipment, which they could not meet. On 25 July 1939, the Polish Cipher Bureau handed reconstructed Enigma machines and their techniques for decrypting ciphers to the French and British. Gordon Welchman wrote, Ultra would never have got off the ground if we had not learned from the Poles, in the nick of time, the details both of the German military Enigma machine, and of the operating procedures that were in use. At Bletchley Park, some of the key people responsible for success against Enigma included mathematicians Alan Turing and Hugh Alexander and, at the British Tabulating Machine Company, chief engineer Harold Keen. After the war, interrogation of German cryptographic personnel led to the conclusion that German cryptanalysts understood that cryptanalytic attacks against Enigma were possible but were thought to require impracticable amounts of effort and investment. The Poles' early start at breaking Enigma and the continuity of their success gave the Allies an advantage when World War II began. ==== Lorenz cipher ==== In June 1941, the Germans started to introduce on-line stream cipher teleprinter systems for strategic point-to-point radio links, to which the British gave the code-name Fish. Several systems were used, principally the Lorenz SZ 40/42 (codenamed "Tunny" by the British) and Geheimfernschreiber ("Sturgeon"). These cipher systems were cryptanalysed, particularly Tunny, which the British thoroughly penetrated. It was eventually attacked using Colossus machines, which were the first digital programme-controlled electronic computers. In many respects the Tunny work was more difficult than for the Enigma, since the British codebreakers had no knowledge of the machine producing it and no head-start such as that the Poles had given them against Enigma. Although the volume of intelligence derived from this system was much smaller than that from Enigma, its importance was often far higher because it produced primarily high-level, strategic intelligence that was sent between Wehrmacht high command (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, OKW). The eventual bulk decryption of Lorenz-enciphered messages contributed significantly, and perhaps decisively, to the defeat of Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, the Tunny story has become much less well known among the public than the Enigma one. At Bletchley Park, some of the key people responsible for success in the Tunny effort included mathematicians W. T. "Bill" Tutte and Max Newman and electrical engineer Tommy Flowers. === Italian === In June 1940, the Italians were using book codes for most of their military messages, except for the Italian Navy, which in early 1941 had started using a version of the Hagelin rotor-based cipher machine C-38. This was broken from June 1941 onwards by the Italian subsection of GC&CS at Bletchley Park. === Japanese === In the Pacific theatre, a Japanese cipher machine, called "Purple" by the Americans, was used for highest-level Japanese diplomatic traffic. It produced a polyalphabetic substitution cipher, but unlike Enigma, was not a rotor machine, being built around electrical stepping switches. It was broken by the US Army Signal Intelligence Service and disseminated as Magic. Detailed reports by the Japanese ambassador to Germany were encrypted on the Purple machine. His reports included reviews of German assessments of the military situation, reviews of strategy and intentions, reports on direct inspections by the ambassador (in one case, of Normandy beach defences), and reports of long interviews with Hitler. The Japanese are said to have obtained an Enigma machine in 1937, although it is debated whether they were given it by the Germans or bought a commercial version, which, apart from the plugboard and internal wiring, was the German Heer/Luftwaffe machine. Having developed a similar machine, the Japanese did not use the Enigma machine for their most secret communications. The chief fleet communications code system used by the Imperial Japanese Navy was called JN-25 by the Americans, and by early 1942 the US Navy had made considerable progress in decrypting Japanese naval messages. The US Army also made progress on the

  Read more →