AI Data Center Map

AI Data Center Map — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  WHATWG

  The Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group (WHATWG) was founded by representatives from Apple Inc., the Mozilla Foundation and Opera Software, leading web browser vendors in 2004. WHATWG is responsible for maintaining multiple web-related technical standards, including the specifications for the HyperText Markup Language (HTML) and the Document Object Model (DOM). The central organizational membership and control of WHATWG – its "Steering Group" – consists of Apple, Mozilla, Google, and Microsoft. WHATWG editors of the specifications ensure correct implementation, in consultation with participants, but ultimately in accordance with Steering Group member objectives. == History == The WHATWG was formed in response to the slow development of World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web standards and W3C's decision to abandon HTML in favor of XML-based technologies. The WHATWG mailing list was announced on 4 June 2004, two days after the initiatives of a joint Opera–Mozilla position paper had been voted down by the W3C members at the W3C Workshop on Web Applications and Compound Documents. On 10 April 2007, the Mozilla Foundation, Apple, and Opera Software proposed that the new HTML working group of the W3C adopt the WHATWG's HTML5 as the starting point of its work and name its future deliverable as "HTML5" (though the WHATWG specification was later renamed HTML Living Standard). On 9 May 2007, the new HTML working group of the W3C resolved to do that. An Internet Explorer platform architect from Microsoft was invited but did not join, citing the lack of a patent policy to ensure all specifications can be implemented on a royalty-free basis. Since then, the W3C and the WHATWG had been developing HTML independently, at times causing specifications to diverge. In 2017, the WHATWG established an intellectual property rights agreement that includes a patent policy. This spurred a renewed attempt to allow the W3C and the WHATWG to work together on specifications. In 2019, the W3C and WHATWG agreed to a memorandum of understanding where development of HTML and DOM specifications would be done principally in the WHATWG. The editor has significant control over the specification, but the community can influence the decisions of the editor. In one case, editor Ian Hickson proposed replacing the tag with a more generic tag, but the community disagreed and the change was reverted. === Web Hypertext Application Technology Task Force === Initially, the name Web Hypertext Application Technology Task Force was also used, along with variant abbreviations including WHAT Working Group, WHAT Task Force and WHATTF. After some time using both the whattf.org and whatwg.org domain names, the name WHATWG was eventually standardized on. The namespace URI http://whattf.org/datatype-draft remains in use for the HTML validator's data type library. === Transition of HTML Publication to WHATWG === On 28 May 2019, the W3C announced that WHATWG would be the sole publisher of the HTML and DOM standards. The W3C and WHATWG had been publishing competing standards since 2012. While the W3C standard was identical to the WHATWG in 2007 the standards have since progressively diverged due to different design decisions. The WHATWG "Living Standard" had been the de facto web standard for some time. == Specifications == The WHATWG publishes a number of standards that form a substantial portion of the web platform including: The HTML Living Standard (sometimes informally called HTML5). The HTML specification has been a living document without version numbers since 2011. It includes both HTML, the core markup language for the web, and a number of related APIs. The DOM Standard, defines how the Document Object Model on the web is supposed to work and replaces W3C DOM level 3. For example, it replaces mutation events with mutation observers. Fetch Standard, which "defines requests, responses, and the process that binds them: fetching." The fetch standard defines the 'fetch' JavaScript API, and supersedes the HTML5 fetch functionality, CORS and the HTTP Origin header semantics. The Streams Standard provides APIs for creating, composing, and consuming streams of data. These streams are designed to map efficiently to low-level I/O primitives, and allow easy composition with built-in backpressure and queueing. On top of streams, the web platform can build higher-level abstractions, such as filesystem or socket APIs, while at the same time users can use the supplied tools to build their own streams which integrate well with those of the web platform. The Encoding Standard defines how character encodings such as Windows-1252 and UTF-8 are handled in web browsers and is intended to replace the IETF encodings registry. The MIME type sniffing standard defines how MIME types are supposed to be sniffed in web browsers. The URL standard defines how URLs are supposed to be parsed in web browsers. Web IDL used to describe interfaces that are intended to be implemented in web browsers.

  Read more →
• 

  Jordan Antiquities Database and Information System

  The Jordan Antiquities Database and Information System (JADIS) was a computer database of antiquities in Jordan, the first of its kind in the Arab world. It was established by the Department of Antiquities in 1990, in cooperation with the American Center for Oriental Research in Amman and sponsored by the United States Agency for International Development. JADIS was in use until 2002, when it was superseded by a new system, MEGA-J. Over 10,841 antiquities were registered in the database. An introduction and printed summary of the database was published by the Department of Antiquities in 1994, edited by Gaetano Palumbo.

  Read more →
• 

  Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity

  The President's Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity is a Presidential Commission formed on April 13, 2016, to develop a plan for protecting cyberspace, and America's economic reliance on it. The commission released its final report in December 2016. The report made recommendations regarding the intertwining roles of the military, government administration and the private sector in providing cyber security. Chairman Donilon said of the report that its coverage "is unusual in the breadth of issues" with which it deals. == Recommendations == The report made sixteen major recommendations with fifty-three specific action items broadly grouped under six areas: Protecting the information and digital infrastructure Investing in the secure growth of information and digital infrastructure Consumer information access Building the cybersecurity workforce Building a secure governmental cybersecurity framework Keeping interconnectivity open, fair, competitive, and secure The Commission found that strong authentication systems were mandatory for adequate cybersecurity, not just for the government, but for all commercial systems, and private individuals. The commission also stressed remote identity proofing and security for the Internet of things (IoT). Finding that technicians who know cybersecurity and can protect systems are few and in short supply, the commission recommended nationally supported training programs to produce an adequate workforce, as well as increasing the level of expertise in the existing workforce. The Commission highlighted the importance of partnerships between government and the private sector as a powerful tool for encouraging the technology, policies and practices we need to secure and grow the digital economy. (page 2) Some criticised the commission's work as lacking an understanding of cybersecurity and not being cognizant of "cyber reality" and the cost of some of the action items, but others found the report constructive and meaningful. == Commission members == The initial members of the Commission are: Tom Donilon, former Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor (Chair) Sam Palmisano, former CEO of IBM (Vice Chair) General Keith Alexander, CEO of IronNet Cybersecurity, former Director of the National Security Agency and former Commander of U.S. Cyber Command Annie Antón, Professor and Chair of the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech. Ajay Banga, President and CEO of MasterCard Steven Chabinsky, General Counsel and Chief Risk Officer of CrowdStrike Patrick Gallagher, Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh and former Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Peter Lee, Corporate Vice President, Microsoft Research Herbert Lin, Senior Research Scholar for Cyber Policy and Security at the Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation and Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution Heather Murren, former member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and co-founder of the Nevada Cancer Institute Joe Sullivan, Chief Security Officer of Uber and former Chief Security Officer of Facebook Maggie Wilderotter, Executive Chairman of Frontier Communications == Follow-on == Incoming President Trump has indicated that he wants a full review of U.S. cyber protection policy. == Notes and references ==

  Read more →
• 

  Reflection lines

  Engineers use reflection lines to judge a surface's quality. Reflection lines reveal surface flaws, particularly discontinuities in normals indicating that the surface is not C 2 {\displaystyle C^{2}} . Reflection lines may be created and examined on physical surfaces or virtual surfaces with the help of computer graphics. For example, the shiny surface of an automobile body is illuminated with reflection lines by surrounding the car with parallel light sources. Virtually, a surface can be rendered with reflection lines by modulating the surfaces point-wise color according to a simple calculation involving the surface normal, viewing direction and a square wave environment map. == Mathematical definition == Consider a point p {\displaystyle p} on a surface M {\displaystyle M} with (normalized) normal n {\displaystyle n} . If an observer views this point from infinity at view direction v {\displaystyle v} then the reflected view direction r {\displaystyle r} is: r = v − 2 ( n ⋅ v ) n . {\displaystyle r=v-2(n\cdot v)n.} (The vector v {\displaystyle v} is decomposed into its normal part v n = ( n ⋅ v ) v {\displaystyle v_{n}=(n\cdot v)v} and tangential part v t = v − v n {\displaystyle v_{t}=v-v_{n}} . Upon reflection, the tangential part is kept and the normal part is negated.) For reflection lines we consider the surface M {\displaystyle M} surrounded by parallel lines with direction a {\displaystyle a} , representing infinite, non-dispersive light sources. For each point p {\displaystyle p} on M {\displaystyle M} we determine which line is seen from direction v {\displaystyle v} . The position on each line is of no interest. Define the vector r p {\displaystyle r_{p}} to be the reflection direction r {\displaystyle r} projected onto a plane P {\displaystyle P} that is orthogonal to a {\displaystyle a} : r p = r − ( r ⋅ a ) a {\displaystyle r_{p}=r-(r\cdot a)a} and similarly let v p {\displaystyle v_{p}} be the viewing direction projected onto P {\displaystyle P} : v p = v − ( v ⋅ a ) a {\displaystyle v_{p}=v-(v\cdot a)a} Finally, define v o {\displaystyle v_{o}} to be the direction lying in P {\displaystyle P} perpendicular to a {\displaystyle a} and v p {\displaystyle v_{p}} : v o = a × v p {\displaystyle v_{o}=a\times v_{p}} Using these vectors, the reflection line function θ ( p ) : M → ( − π , π ] {\displaystyle \theta (p):M\rightarrow (-\pi ,\pi ]} is a scalar function mapping points p {\displaystyle p} on the surface to angles between v p {\displaystyle v_{p}} and r p {\displaystyle r_{p}} : θ = arctan ⁡ ( r p ⋅ v o , r p ⋅ v p ) {\displaystyle \theta =\arctan {(r_{p}\cdot v_{o},r_{p}\cdot v_{p})}} where a r c t a n ( y , x ) {\displaystyle arctan(y,x)} is the atan2 function producing a number in the range ( − π , π ] {\displaystyle (-\pi ,\pi ]} . ( v p {\displaystyle v_{p}} and v o {\displaystyle v_{o}} can be viewed as a local coordinate system in P {\displaystyle P} with x {\displaystyle x} -axis in direction v p {\displaystyle v_{p}} and y {\displaystyle y} -axis in direction v o {\displaystyle v_{o}} .) Finally, to render the reflection lines positive values θ > 0 {\displaystyle \theta >0} are mapped to a light color and non-positive values to a dark color. == Highlight lines == Highlight lines are a view-independent alternative to reflection lines. Here the projected normal is directly compared against some arbitrary vector x {\displaystyle x} perpendicular to the light source: θ = arctan ⁡ ( n a ⋅ a ⊥ , n a ⋅ x ) {\displaystyle \theta =\arctan {(n_{a}\cdot a^{\perp },n_{a}\cdot x)}} where n a {\displaystyle n_{a}} is the surface normal projected on the light source plane P {\displaystyle P} : n a ^ / | n a ^ | , n a ^ = n − ( n ⋅ a ) a {\displaystyle {\hat {n_{a}}}/|{\hat {n_{a}}}|,{\hat {n_{a}}}=n-(n\cdot a)a} The relationship between reflection lines and highlight lines is likened to that between specular and diffuse shading.

  Read more →
• 

  Dr. Sbaitso

  Dr. Sbaitso ( SPAYT-soh) is an artificial intelligence speech synthesis program released late in 1991 by Creative Labs in Singapore for MS-DOS-based personal computers. The name is an acronym for "SoundBlaster Acting Intelligent Text-to-Speech Operator." == History == Dr. Sbaitso was distributed with various sound cards manufactured by Creative Technology in the early 1990s. The text-to-speech engine used is a version of Monologue, which was developed by First Byte Software. Monologue is a later release of First Byte's "SmoothTalker" software from 1984. The program "conversed" with the user as if it were a psychologist, though most of its responses were along the lines of "WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT WAY?" rather than any sort of complicated interaction. When confronted with a phrase it could not understand, it would often reply with something such as "THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM." Dr. Sbaitso repeated text out loud that was typed after the word "SAY." Repeated swearing or abusive behavior on the part of the user caused Dr. Sbaitso to "break down" in a "PARITY ERROR" before resetting itself. The same would happen, if the user types "SAY PARITY." The program introduced itself with the following lines: HELLO [UserName], MY NAME IS DOCTOR SBAITSO. I AM HERE TO HELP YOU. SAY WHATEVER IS IN YOUR MIND FREELY, OUR CONVERSATION WILL BE KEPT IN STRICT CONFIDENCE. MEMORY CONTENTS WILL BE WIPED OFF AFTER YOU LEAVE, SO, TELL ME ABOUT YOUR PROBLEMS. The program was designed to showcase the digitized voices the cards were able to produce, though the quality was far from lifelike. Additionally, there was a version of this program for Microsoft Windows through the use of a program called Prody Parrot; this version of the software featured a more detailed graphical user interface. The text-to-speech was also used as the voice of 1st Prize from the Baldi's Basics series, albeit slowed down. == Commands == If the user submits "HELP", a list of commands will appear. If the user then submits "M", more commands will appear. There are three pages of commands in total, with guidance on how to use each of the features.

  Read more →
• 

  WebGPU Shading Language

  WebGPU Shading Language (WGSL, internet media type: text/wgsl) is a high-level shading language and the normative shader language for the WebGPU API on the web. WGSL's syntax is influenced by Rust and is designed with strong static validation, explicit resource binding, and portability in mind for secure execution in browsers. In web contexts, WebGPU implementations accept WGSL source and perform compilation to platform-specific intermediate forms (for example, to SPIR‑V, DXIL, or MSL via the user agent), but such backends are not exposed to web content. == History and background == Graphics on the web historically used WebGL, with shaders written in GLSL ES. As applications demanded more modern GPU features and finer control over compute and graphics pipelines, the W3C's GPU for the Web Community Group and Working Group created WebGPU and its companion shading language, WGSL, to provide a secure, portable model suitable for the web platform. WGSL was developed to be human-readable, avoid undefined behavior common in legacy shading languages, and align closely with WebGPU's resource and validation model. == Design goals == WGSL's design emphasizes: Safety and determinism suitable for web security constraints (extensive static validation and well-defined semantics). Portability across diverse GPU backends via an abstract resource model shared with WebGPU. Readability and explicitness (no preprocessor, minimal implicit conversions, explicit address spaces and bindings). Alignment with modern GPU features (compute, storage buffers, textures, atomics) while retaining a familiar C/Rust-like syntax. == Language overview == === Types and values === Core scalar types include bool, i32, u32, and f32. Vectors (e.g., vec2, vec3, vec4) and matrices (up to 4×4) are available for floating-point element types. Optional f16 (half precision) may be enabled via a WebGPU feature; availability is implementation-dependent. Atomic types (atomic, atomic) support limited atomic operations in qualified address spaces. === Variables and address spaces === Variables are declared with let (immutable), var (mutable), or const (compile-time constant). Storage classes (address spaces) include function, private, workgroup, uniform, and storage with read or read_write access as applicable. WGSL defines explicit layout and alignment rules; attributes such as @align, @size, and @stride control data layout for buffer interoperability. === Functions and control flow === Functions use explicit parameter and return types. Control flow includes if, switch, for, while, and loop constructs, with break/continue. Recursion is disallowed; entry-point call graphs must be acyclic. === Entry points and attributes === Shaders define stage entry points with @vertex, @fragment, or @compute. Attributes annotate bindings and interfaces, including @group, @binding (resource binding), @location (user-defined I/O), @builtin (stage built-ins such as position or global_invocation_id), @interpolate, and @workgroup_size. === Resources === WGSL exposes buffers (uniform, storage), textures (sampled, storage, and multisampled variants), and samplers (filtering/non-filtering/comparison). The binding model is explicit via descriptor sets called groups and bindings, matching WebGPU's pipeline layout model. == Compilation and validation == Browsers compile WGSL to platform-appropriate representations and native driver formats; the specific compilation pipeline is not observable by web content. WGSL source undergoes strict parsing and static validation, and WebGPU enforces robust resource access rules to avoid out-of-bounds memory hazards, contributing to predictable behavior across implementations. == Shader stages == WGSL supports three pipeline stages: vertex, fragment, and compute. === Vertex shaders === Vertex shaders transform per-vertex inputs and produce values for rasterization, including a clip-space position written to the position builtin. ==== Example ==== === Fragment shaders === Fragment shaders run per-fragment and compute color (and optionally depth) outputs written to color attachments. ==== Example ==== If half-precision (vec4h, shorthand for vec4) is desired, the code must be prefaced with a enable f16; statement. === Compute shaders === Compute shaders run in workgroups and are used for general-purpose GPU computations. ==== Example ==== == Differences from GLSL and HLSL == Compared with legacy shading languages, WGSL: Omits a preprocessor and requires explicit types and conversions. Uses explicit address spaces and binding annotations aligned with WebGPU's model. Enforces strict validation to avoid undefined behavior common in other shading languages. Defines a portable, web-focused feature set; 16-bit types and other features are opt-in and may depend on device capabilities.

  Read more →
• 

  MY F.C.

  MY F.C. is a freemium app designed to organise and administer football teams. It is developed by MY F.C. Limited, a private company headquartered in Auckland, New Zealand. The app allows users to build a team by adding players and from there they can create trainings and matches, keep up with relevant news in the curated newsfeed, record statistics both individually and team based, follow the games live in the match-centre. The app also features integrated lineup builder with custom team kits. == History == Founders Sam Jenkins, Mike Simpson and Sam Jasper started MY F.C. in 2015 to help them "run their football lives". The app was launched on Android and iOS on 14 February 2017. == Accolades == MY F.C. won the first place prize at Bank of New Zealand Start-up Alley 2017 competition that aims to discover New Zealand start-ups who are doing innovative work and ready to establish themselves as long-term, sustainable businesses. The prize package included $15,000 and a trip to San Francisco.

  Read more →
• 

  Metadatabase

  Metadatabase is a database model for (1) metadata management, (2) global query of independent databases, and (3) distributed data processing. The word metadatabase is an addition to the dictionary. Originally, metadata was only a common term referring simply to "data about data", such as tags, keywords, and markup headers. However, in this technology, the concept of metadata is extended to also include such data and knowledge representation as information models (e.g., relations, entities-relationships, and objects), application logic (e.g., production rules), and analytic models (e.g., simulation, optimization, and mathematical algorithms). In the case of analytic models, it is also referred to as a Modelbase. These classes of metadata are integrated with some modeling ontology to give rise to a stable set of meta-relations (tables of metadata). Individual models are interpreted as metadata and entered into these tables. As such, models are inserted, retrieved, updated, and deleted in the same manner as ordinary data do in an ordinary (relational) database. Users will also formulate global queries and requests for processing of local databases through the Metadatabase, using the globally integrated metadata. The Metadatabase structure can be implemented in any open technology for relational databases. == Significance == The Metadatabase technology is developed at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at Troy, New York, by a group of faculty and students (see the references at the end of the article), starting in late 1980s. Its main contribution includes the extension of the concept of metadata and metadata management, and the original approach of designing a database for metadata applications. These conceptual results continue to motivate new research and new applications. At the level of particular design, its openness and scalability is tied to that of the particular ontology proposed: It requires reverse-representation of the application models in order to save them into the meta-relations. In theory, the ontology is neutral, and it has been proven in some industrial applications. However, it needs more development to establish it for the field as an open technology. The requirement of reverse-representation is common to any global information integration technology. A way to facilitate it in the Metadatabase approach is to distribute a core portion of it at each local site, to allow for peer-to-peer translation on the fly.

  Read more →
• 

  Aporia (company)

  Aporia is a machine learning observability platform based in Tel Aviv, Israel. The company has a US office located in San Jose, California. Aporia has developed software for monitoring and controlling undetected defects and failures used by other companies to detect and report anomalies, and warn in the early stages of faults. == History == Aporia was founded in 2019 by Liran Hason and Alon Gubkin. In April 2021, the company raised a $5 million seed round for its monitoring platform for ML models. In February 2022, the company closed a Series A round of $25 million for its ML observability platform. Aporia was named by Forbes as the Next Billion-Dollar Company in June 2022. In November, the company partnered with ClearML, an MLOPs platform, to improve ML pipeline optimization. In January 2023, Aporia launched Direct Data Connectors, a novel technology allowing organizations to monitor their ML models in minutes (previously the process of integrating ML monitoring into a customer’s cloud environment took weeks or more.) DDC (Direct Data Connectors) enables users to connect Aporia to their preferred data source and monitor all of their data at once, without data sampling or data duplication (which is a huge security risk for major organizations. In April 2023, Aporia announced the company partnered with Amazon Web Services (AWS) to provide more reliable ML observability to AWS consumers by deploying Aporia's architecture to their AWS environment, this will allow customers to monitor their models in production regardless of platform.

  Read more →
• 

  Transparency in the software supply chain

  Transparency in the software supply chain is a condition in which participants involved in the development, procurement, operation, auditing, or regulation of software can determine which components, dependencies, build stages, identifiers, and relationships within the supply chain make up the delivered product. The disclosure of information about software components, their interrelationships, origins, and development methods—for the purposes of risk management, vulnerability detection, and compliance—takes place throughout the software lifecycle. Transparency is one of the key security attributes of the software supply chain, as a deeper understanding of the chain enables participants to identify vulnerabilities and mitigate threats. Problems in the software supply chain can cause billions in losses and create operational challenges for government and commercial entities, as demonstrated by incidents involving SolarWinds, Bybit, 3CX, Jaguar Land Rover, GitHub, and NotPetya. Modern software is often assembled from third-party libraries and open-source components. According to research by the Linux Foundation and Synopsys, 96% of the commercial codebases analyzed contained open-source software, and 70–90% of a typical codebase may consist of open-source components. Without transparency, any software component can become a threat. As a result, companies may spend billions of dollars building robust external defenses, but this will not protect against vulnerabilities in legitimate software inside the perimeter. At the same time, supply chain attacks also erode trust between customers and their IT providers, as malicious code is often embedded in official updates with certificates and digital signatures. One of the primary ways to ensure transparency is through a software bill of materials, which documents the components used to create the software and the relationships within the supply chain. == Concept == The software supply chain is the collection of systems, devices, people, artifacts, and processes involved in the creation of the final software product. Attacks on the software supply chain differ from conventional attacks in that they follow a four-stage pattern: compromise, modification, distribution, and subsequent exploitation of the compromised or modified component. A defining feature of a supply chain attack is the introduction or manipulation of a change at an upstream stage, which is subsequently exploited at a downstream stage. Transparency refers to the availability of knowledge about the chain, while validity concerns the integrity of operations and artifacts and the authentication of participants, and separation involves reducing unnecessary trust relationships and the radius of impact through compartmentalization. In this framework, transparency primarily helps during the pre-compromise and detection phases, as a clearer understanding of participants, operations, and artifacts makes it easier to identify weak links before attackers exploit them. Current major attack vectors include dependencies and containers, build infrastructure, and human participants, such as maintainers or developers. == History == Software supply-chain transparency developed from earlier efforts to document software components, long before the term came into widespread use in the cybersecurity field. Early component-documentation formats included SPDX, first published in 2011, and CycloneDX, first published in 2017. Initially, these formats were created to support license compliance, package identification, and tool compatibility. Their development helped shape a broader concept of software supply chain transparency, encompassing component documentation, disclosure practices, risk management, security analysis, and regulatory compliance. In 2018, the U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration launched a multistakeholder process on promoting software component transparency. This process helped move work on SBOMs from a specialized technical practice into the realm of policy and procurement to identify components used in software products. The 2020 compromise of the SolarWinds Orion platform made software supply chain security a central issue in government cybersecurity policy. An analysis of the “Sunburst” campaign prepared by the Atlantic Council noted that the vulnerability of the software supply chain had become a realized risk for national-security agencies. In May 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden issued Executive Order 14028, which directed federal agencies to improve cybersecurity and increase transparency in the software supply chain, including requirements related to SBOMs. Reuters reported that the executive order required software developers selling their products to the federal government to provide greater visibility into their software and make security data available. In July 2021, the NTIA published the document “The Minimum Elements for a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM)”, defining the basic data fields and practices for creating SBOMs. Between 2021 and 2025, the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency updated its guidance on “Framing Software Component Transparency”, expanding the set of SBOM attributes, metadata requirements, and operational recommendations for the creation, exchange, and use of SBOMs. Major incidents that occurred following the SolarWinds attack have underscored the importance of transparency in vulnerability management and supply chain security. The Log4Shell vulnerability in the Log4j library, disclosed in December 2021, demonstrated how difficult it can be for organizations to identify a vulnerable component deeply embedded within applications and services. In 2024, an attempt to plant a backdoor in XZ Utils showed how attackers could exploit trust in open-source maintenance processes to introduce malicious code into widely used infrastructure software. By the mid-2020s, software supply chain transparency had become part of international cybersecurity coordination and regulation. On September 3, 2025, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and the National Cybersecurity Office, in collaboration with cybersecurity agencies from 15 countries, released the document “A Shared Vision of Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) for Cybersecurity.” In the European Union, the Cyber Resilience Act required manufacturers of products with digital elements to create, maintain, and retain SBOMs as part of the technical documentation for software placed on the EU market. == Transparency mechanisms == The primary mechanism for ensuring transparency is the software bill of materials (SBOM). An SBOM is a structured list of components, libraries, and tools used to build and distribute a software product, and it records dependencies in a way that helps organizations understand and assess their software supply chains. It can also be described as a formal record of components and their interdependencies, which gives users insight into their actual exposure to risks and threats. Five key areas of SBOM application in software supply chain security have been identified: vulnerability management, ensuring transparency, component evaluation, risk assessment, and ensuring supply chain integrity. In software supply chains, an SBOM documents all components, both open-source and proprietary. Under Executive Order 14028, U.S. federal agencies require software suppliers to provide SBOMs for government-procured software. The list of minimum required SBOM elements defined by NTIA includes three main categories: required data fields for describing each component (name, version, identifiers), automation support (machine-readable format, generation tools), and recommendations for creating SBOMs during development and purchasing. The post-2021 push for SBOMs was intended to provide visibility into the components used within software and to expose parts of an application that would otherwise remain hidden. This information can be used to prioritize patches, manage vulnerabilities, and support compliance work. Transparency also supports software traceability, which is becoming a standard feature of developer platforms. Traceability has become important because organizations are increasingly required to demonstrate how software was created, rather than simply listing its components. Higher levels of assurance require signed, tamper-proof traceability and more isolated, verifiable build environments. A related mechanism is build reproducibility. Reproducible builds are defined as build processes that make the compilation process deterministic, ensuring that the same source code always produces the same binary file. These builds are considered a foundational element for distributed verification, transparency-log maintenance, supply-chain workflow integration, and the creation of keyless signatures based on verifiable logs. Although reproducibility does not replace inventory or attestation, it gives external par

  Read more →
• 

  Online service provider

  An online service provider (OSP) can, for example, be an Internet service provider, an email provider, a news provider (press), an entertainment provider (music, movies), a search engine, an e-commerce site, an online banking site, a health site, an official government site, social media, a wiki, or a Usenet newsgroup. In its original more limited definition, it referred only to a commercial computer communication service in which paid members could dial via a computer modem the service's private computer network and access various services and information resources such as bulletin board systems, downloadable files and programs, news articles, chat rooms, and electronic mail services. The term "online service" was also used in references to these dial-up services. The traditional dial-up online service differed from the modern Internet service provider in that they provided a large degree of content that was only accessible by those who subscribed to the online service, while ISP mostly serves to provide access to the Internet and generally provides little if any exclusive content of its own. In the U.S., the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) portion of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act has expanded the legal definition of online service in two different ways for different portions of the law. It states in section 512(k)(1): (A) As used in subsection (a), the term "service provider" means an entity offering the transmission, routing, or providing of connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received. (B) As used in this section, other than subsection (a), the term "service provider" means a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities therefore, and includes an entity described in subparagraph (A). These broad definitions make it possible for numerous web businesses to benefit from the OCILLA. == History == The first commercial online services went live in 1969. CompuServe (owned in the 1980s and 1990s by H&R Block) and The Source (for a time owned by The Reader's Digest) are considered the first major online services created to serve the market of personal computer users. Utilizing text-based interfaces and menus, these services allowed anyone with a modem and communications software to use email, chat, news, financial and stock information, bulletin boards, special interest groups (SIGs), forums and general information. Subscribers could exchange email only with other subscribers of the same service. (For a time a service called DASnet carried mail among several online services, and CompuServe, MCI Mail, and other services experimented with X.400 protocols to exchange email until the Internet rendered these outmoded.) Other text-based online services followed such as Delphi, GEnie and MCI Mail. The 1980s also saw the rise of independent Computer Bulletin Boards, or BBSes. (Online services are not BBSes. An online service may contain an electronic bulletin board, but the term "BBS" is reserved for independent dialup, microcomputer-based services that are usually single-user systems.) The commercial services used pre-existing packet-switched (X.25) data communications networks, or the services' own networks (as with CompuServe). In either case, users dialed into local access points and were connected to remote computer centers where information and services were located. As with telephone service, subscribers paid by the minute, with separate day-time and evening/weekend rates. As the use of computers that supported color and graphics, such the Atari 8-bit computers, Commodore 64, TI-99/4A, Apple II, and early IBM PC compatibles, increased, online services gradually developed framed or partially graphical information displays. Early services such as CompuServe added increasingly sophisticated graphics-based front end software to present their information, though they continued to offer text-based access for those who needed or preferred it. In 1985 Viewtron, which began as a Videotex service requiring a dedicated terminal, introduced software allowing home computer owners access. Beginning in the mid-1980s graphics based online services such as PlayNET, Prodigy, and Quantum Link (aka Q-Link) were developed. Quantum Link, which was based on Commodore-only Playnet software, later developed AppleLink Personal Edition, PC-Link (based on Tandy's DeskMate), and Promenade (for IBM), all of which (including Q-Link) were later combined as America Online. These online services presaged the web browser that would change global online life 10 years later. Before Quantum Link, Apple computer had developed its own service, called AppleLink, which was mostly a support network targeted at Apple dealers and developers. Later, Apple offered the short-lived eWorld, targeted at Mac consumers and based on the Mac version of the America Online software. Beginning in 1992, the Internet, which had previously been limited to government, academic, and corporate research settings, was opened to commercial entities. The first online service to offer Internet access was DELPHI, which had developed TCP/IP access much earlier, in connection with an environmental group that rated Internet access. The explosion of popularity of the World Wide Web in 1994 accelerated the development of the Internet as an information and communication resource for consumers and businesses. The sudden availability of low- to no-cost email and appearance of free independent web sites broke the business model that had supported the rise of the early online service industry. CompuServe, BIX, AOL, DELPHI, and Prodigy gradually added access to Internet e-mail, Usenet newsgroups, ftp, and to web sites. At the same time, they moved from usage-based billing to monthly subscriptions. Similarly, companies that paid to have AOL host their information or early online stores began to develop their own web sites, putting further stress on the economics of the online industry. Only the largest services like AOL (which later acquired CompuServe, just as CompuServe acquired The Source) were able to make the transition to the Internet-centric world. A new class of online service provider arose to provide access to the Internet, the internet service provider or ISP. Internet-only service providers like UUNET, The Pipeline, Panix, Netcom, the World, EarthLink, and MindSpring provided no content of their own, concentrating their efforts on making it easy for nontechnical users to install the various software required to "get online" before consumer operating systems came internet-enabled out of the box. In contrast to the online services' multitiered per-minute or per-hour rates, many ISPs offered flat-fee, unlimited access plans. Independent companies sprang up to offer access and packages to compete with the big networks (eg, the-wire.com, 1994 in Toronto and bway.net 1995 in New York). These providers first offered access through telephone and modem, just as did the early online services providers. By the early 2000s, these independent ISPs had largely been supplanted by high speed and broadband access through cable and phone companies, as well as wireless access. The importance of the online services industry was vital in "paving the road" for the information superhighway. When Mosaic and Netscape were released in 1994, they had a ready audience of more than 10 million people who were able to download their first web browser through an online service. Though ISPs quickly began offering software packages with setup to their customers, this brief period gave many users their first online experience. Two online services in particular, Prodigy and AOL, are often confused with the Internet, or the origins of the Internet. Prodigy's Chief Technical Officer said in 1999: "Eleven years ago, the Internet was just an intangible dream that Prodigy brought to life. Now it is a force to be reckoned with." Despite that statement, neither service provided the back bone for the Internet, nor did either start the Internet. == Online service interfaces == The first online service used a simple text-based interface in which content was largely text only and users made choices via a command prompt. This allowed just about any computer with a modem and terminal communications program the ability to access these text-based online services. CompuServe would later offer, with the advent of the Apple Macintosh and Microsoft Windows-based PCs, a GUI interface program for their service. This provided a very rudimentary GUI interface. CompuServe continued to offer text-only access for those needing it. Online services like Prodigy and AOL developed their online service around a GUI and thus unlike CompuServe's early GUI-based software, these online services provided a more robust GUI interface. Early GUI-base

  Read more →
• 

  Period-tracking app

  Period-tracking apps are mobile applications used to track the menstrual cycle. They may be used to predict menstruation, to plan fertility, and to track health. Examples include Clue, Glow, and Flo. == Function == Users enter their dates of menstruation, and frequently other experiences such as vaginal discharge and spotting; premenstrual syndrome; changes in mood; menstrual cramps and other pain; and other symptoms such as appetite changes, bloating, and acne. The apps predict the date of users' next period, and often also their ovulation and fertile window. Some apps have additional features such as contraceptive reminders, educational content, tracking modes for use during pregnancy, or the ability to share one's menstrual cycle data with a partner. == Privacy == Period-tracking apps collect personal health data, potentially raising concerns about privacy. Researchers have warned that data may be transferred to third parties and used for consumer profiling and targeted advertising, used for employment and health insurance discrimination, or used to prosecute users for seeking abortions. After the 2022 decision by the United States Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, and the bans and restrictions on abortion in many US states that followed, many American women uninstalled the apps amidst fear that the data could be accessed by law enforcement and used to prosecute users. WIRED published a ranking of several period-tracking apps by data privacy.

  Read more →
• 

  NetOwl

  NetOwl is a suite of multilingual text and identity analytics products that analyze big data in the form of text data – reports, web, social media, etc. – as well as structured entity data about people, organizations, places, and things. NetOwl utilizes artificial intelligence (AI)-based approaches, including natural language processing (NLP), machine learning (ML), and computational linguistics, to extract entities, relationships, and events; to perform sentiment analysis; to assign latitude/longitude to geographical references in text; to translate names written in foreign languages; and to perform name matching and identity resolution. NetOwl's uses include semantic search and discovery, geospatial analysis, intelligence analysis, content enrichment, compliance monitoring, cyber threat monitoring, risk management, and bioinformatics. == History == The first NetOwl product was NetOwl Extractor, which was initially released in 1996. Since then, Extractor has added many new capabilities, including relationship and event extraction, categorization, name translation, geotagging, and sentiment analysis, as well as entity extraction in other languages. Other products were added later to the NetOwl suite, namely TextMiner, NameMatcher, and EntityMatcher. NetOwl has participated in several 3rd party-sponsored text and entity analytics software benchmarking events. NetOwl Extractor was the top-scoring named entity extraction system at the DARPA-sponsored Message Understanding Conference MUC-6 and the top-scoring link and event extraction system in MUC-7. It was also the top-scoring system at several of the NIST-sponsored Automatic Content Extraction (ACE) evaluation tasks. NetOwl NameMatcher was the top-scoring system at the MITRE Challenge for Multicultural Person Name Matching. == Products == The NetOwl suite includes, among others, the following text and entity analytics products: === Text Analytics === NetOwl Extractor performs entity extraction from unstructured texts using natural language processing (NLP), machine learning (ML), and computational linguistics. Extractor also performs semantic relationship and event extraction as well as geotagging of text. It is used for a variety of data sources including both traditional sources (e.g., news, reports, web pages, email) and social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, chats, blogs). It runs on a variety of Big Data analytics platforms, including Apache Hadoop and LexisNexis’s High-Performance Computer Cluster (HPCC) technology. It has been integrated with a number of 3rd party analytical tools such as Esri ArcGIS and Google Earth/Maps. === Identity Analytics === NetOwl NameMatcher and EntityMatcher perform name matching and identity resolution for large multicultural and multilingual entity databases using machine learning (ML) and computational linguistics approaches. They are used for applications such as anti–money laundering (AML), watch lists, regulatory compliance, fraud detection, etc.

  Read more →
• 

  Open-source software security

  Open-source software security is the measure of assurance or guarantee in the freedom from danger and risk inherent to an open-source software system. == Implementation debate == === Benefits === Proprietary software forces the user to accept the level of security that the software vendor is willing to deliver and to accept the rate that patches and updates are released. It is assumed that any compiler that is used creates code that can be trusted, but it has been demonstrated by Ken Thompson that a compiler can be subverted using a compiler backdoor to create faulty executables that are unwittingly produced by a well-intentioned developer. With access to the source code for the compiler, the developer has at least the ability to discover if there is any mal-intention. Kerckhoffs' principle is based on the idea that an enemy can steal a secure military system and not be able to compromise the information. His ideas were the basis for many modern security practices, and followed that security through obscurity is a bad practice. === Drawbacks === Simply making source code available does not guarantee review. An example of this occurring is when Marcus Ranum, an expert on security system design and implementation, released his first public firewall toolkit. At one time, there were over 2,000 sites using his toolkit, but only 10 people gave him any feedback or patches. Having a large amount of eyes reviewing code can "lull a user into a false sense of security". Having many users look at source code does not guarantee that security flaws will be found and fixed. == Metrics and models == There are a variety of models and metrics to measure the security of a system. These are a few methods that can be used to measure the security of software systems. === Number of days between vulnerabilities === It is argued that a system is most vulnerable after a potential vulnerability is discovered, but before a patch is created. By measuring the number of days between the vulnerability and when the vulnerability is fixed, a basis can be determined on the security of the system. There are a few caveats to such an approach: not every vulnerability is equally bad, and fixing a lot of bugs quickly might not be better than only finding a few and taking a little bit longer to fix them, taking into account the operating system, or the effectiveness of the fix. === Poisson process === The Poisson process can be used to measure the rates at which different people find security flaws between open and closed source software. The process can be broken down by the number of volunteers Nv and paid reviewers Np. The rates at which volunteers find a flaw is measured by λv and the rate that paid reviewers find a flaw is measured by λp. The expected time that a volunteer group is expected to find a flaw is 1/(Nv λv) and the expected time that a paid group is expected to find a flaw is 1/(Np λp). === Morningstar model === By comparing a large variety of open source and closed source projects a star system could be used to analyze the security of the project similar to how Morningstar, Inc. rates mutual funds. With a large enough data set, statistics could be used to measure the overall effectiveness of one group over the other. An example of such as system is as follows: 1 Star: Many security vulnerabilities. 2 Stars: Reliability issues. 3 Stars: Follows best security practices. 4 Stars: Documented secure development process. 5 Stars: Passed independent security review. === Coverity scan === Coverity in collaboration with Stanford University has established a new baseline for open-source quality and security. The development is being completed through a contract with the Department of Homeland Security. They are utilizing innovations in automated defect detection to identify critical types of bugs found in software. The level of quality and security is measured in rungs. Rungs do not have a definitive meaning, and can change as Coverity releases new tools. Rungs are based on the progress of fixing issues found by the Coverity Analysis results and the degree of collaboration with Coverity. They start with Rung 0 and currently go up to Rung 2. Rung 0 The project has been analyzed by Coverity's Scan infrastructure, but no representatives from the open-source software have come forward for the results. Rung 1 At rung 1, there is collaboration between Coverity and the development team. The software is analyzed with a subset of the scanning features to prevent the development team from being overwhelmed. Rung 2 There are 11 projects that have been analyzed and upgraded to the status of Rung 2 by reaching zero defects in the first year of the scan. These projects include: AMANDA, ntp, OpenPAM, OpenVPN, Overdose, Perl, PHP, Postfix, Python, Samba, and Tcl.

  Read more →
• 

  Big data

  Big data primarily refers to data sets that are too large or complex to be dealt with by traditional data-processing software. Data with many entries (rows) offers greater statistical power, while data with higher complexity (more attributes or columns) may lead to a higher false discovery rate. Big data analysis challenges include capturing data, data storage, data analysis, search, sharing, transfer, visualization, querying, updating, information privacy, and data sources. Big data was originally associated with three key concepts: volume, variety, and velocity. The analysis of big data that have only volume, velocity, and variety can pose challenges in sampling. A fourth concept, veracity, which refers to the level of reliability of data, was thus added. Without sufficient investment in expertise to ensure big data veracity, the volume and variety of data can produce costs and risks that exceed an organization's capacity to create and capture value from big data. Current usage of the term big data tends to refer to the use of predictive analytics, user behavior analytics, or certain other advanced data analytics methods that extract value from big data, and seldom to a particular size of data set. "There is little doubt that the quantities of data now available are indeed large, but that's not the most relevant characteristic of this new data ecosystem." Analysis of data sets can find new correlations to "spot business trends, prevent diseases, combat crime and so on". Scientists, business executives, medical practitioners, advertising and governments alike regularly meet difficulties with large datasets in areas including Internet searches, fintech, healthcare analytics, geographic information systems, urban informatics, and business informatics. Scientists encounter limitations in e-Science work, including meteorology, genomics, connectomics, complex physics simulations, biology, and environmental research. The size and number of available data sets have grown rapidly as data is collected by devices such as mobile devices, cheap and numerous information-sensing Internet of things devices, aerial (remote sensing) equipment, software logs, cameras, microphones, radio-frequency identification (RFID) readers and wireless sensor networks. The world's technological per-capita capacity to store information has roughly doubled every 40 months since the 1980s; as of 2012, every day 2.5 exabytes (2.17×260 bytes) of data are generated. Based on an IDC report prediction, the global data volume was predicted to grow exponentially from 4.4 zettabytes to 44 zettabytes between 2013 and 2020. By 2025, IDC predicts there will be 163 zettabytes of data. According to IDC, global spending on big data and business analytics (BDA) solutions is estimated to reach $215.7 billion in 2021. Statista reported that the global big data market is forecasted to grow to $103 billion by 2027. In 2011 McKinsey & Company reported, if US healthcare were to use big data creatively and effectively to drive efficiency and quality, the sector could create more than $300 billion in value every year. In the developed economies of Europe, government administrators could save more than €100 billion ($149 billion) in operational efficiency improvements alone by using big data. And users of services enabled by personal-location data could capture $600 billion in consumer surplus. One question for large enterprises is determining who should own big-data initiatives that affect the entire organization. Relational database management systems and desktop statistical software packages used to visualize data often have difficulty processing and analyzing big data. The processing and analysis of big data may require "massively parallel software running on tens, hundreds, or even thousands of servers". What qualifies as "big data" varies depending on the capabilities of those analyzing it and their tools. Furthermore, expanding capabilities make big data a moving target. "For some organizations, facing hundreds of gigabytes of data for the first time may trigger a need to reconsider data management options. For others, it may take tens or hundreds of terabytes before data size becomes a significant consideration." == Definition == The term big data has been in use since the 1990s, with some giving credit to John Mashey for popularizing the term. Big data usually includes data sets with sizes beyond the ability of commonly used software tools to capture, curate, manage, and process data within a tolerable elapsed time. Big data philosophy encompasses unstructured, semi-structured and structured data; however, the main focus is on unstructured data. Big data "size" is a constantly moving target; as of 2012 ranging from a few dozen terabytes to many zettabytes of data. Big data requires a set of techniques and technologies with new forms of integration to reveal insights from datasets that are diverse, complex, and of a massive scale. Variability is often included as an additional quality of big data. A 2018 definition states "Big data is where parallel computing tools are needed to handle data", and notes, "This represents a distinct and clearly defined change in the computer science used, via parallel programming theories, and losses of some of the guarantees and capabilities made by Codd's relational model." In a comparative study of big datasets, Kitchin and McArdle found that none of the commonly considered characteristics of big data appear consistently across all of the analyzed cases. For this reason, other studies identified the redefinition of power dynamics in knowledge discovery as the defining trait. Instead of focusing on the intrinsic characteristics of big data, this alternative perspective pushes forward a relational understanding of the object claiming that what matters is the way in which data is collected, stored, made available and analyzed. === Big data vs. business intelligence === The growing maturity of the concept more starkly delineates the difference between "big data" and "business intelligence": Business intelligence uses applied mathematics tools and descriptive statistics with data with high information density to measure things, detect trends, etc. Big data uses mathematical analysis, optimization, inductive statistics, and concepts from nonlinear system identification to infer laws (regressions, nonlinear relationships, and causal effects) from large sets of data with low information density to reveal relationships and dependencies, or to perform predictions of outcomes and behaviors. == Characteristics == Big data can be described by the following characteristics: Volume The quantity of generated and stored data. The size of the data determines the value and potential insight, and whether it can be considered big data or not. The size of big data is usually larger than terabytes and petabytes. Variety The type and nature of the data. Earlier technologies like RDBMSs were capable to handle structured data efficiently and effectively. However, the change in type and nature from structured to semi-structured or unstructured challenged the existing tools and technologies. Big data technologies evolved with the prime intention to capture, store, and process the semi-structured and unstructured (variety) data generated with high speed (velocity), and huge in size (volume). Later, these tools and technologies were explored and used for handling structured data also but preferable for storage. Eventually, the processing of structured data was still kept as optional, either using big data or traditional RDBMSs. This helps in analyzing data towards effective usage of the hidden insights exposed from the data collected via social media, log files, sensors, etc. Big data draws from text, images, audio, video; plus it completes missing pieces through data fusion. Velocity The speed at which the data is generated and processed to meet the demands and challenges that lie in the path of growth and development. Big data is often available in real-time. Compared to small data, big data is produced more continually. Two kinds of velocity related to big data are the frequency of generation and the frequency of handling, recording, and publishing. Veracity The truthfulness or reliability of the data, which refers to the data quality and the data value. Big data must not only be large in size, but also must be reliable in order to achieve value in the analysis of it. The data quality of captured data can vary greatly, affecting an accurate analysis. Value The worth in information that can be achieved by the processing and analysis of large datasets. Value also can be measured by an assessment of the other qualities of big data. Value may also represent the profitability of information that is retrieved from the analysis of big data. Variability The characteristic of the changing formats, structure, or sources of big data. Big data can include structured, unstructured,

  Read more →