AI Face Combiner

AI Face Combiner — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Control-flow integrity

  Control-flow integrity (CFI) is a general term for computer security techniques that prevent a wide variety of malware attacks from redirecting the flow of execution (the control flow) of a program. == Background == A computer program commonly changes its control flow to make decisions and use different parts of the code. Such transfers may be direct, in that the target address is written in the code itself, or indirect, in that the target address itself is a variable in memory or a CPU register. In a typical function call, the program performs a direct call, but returns to the caller function using the stack – an indirect backward-edge transfer. When a function pointer is called, such as from a virtual table, we say there is an indirect forward-edge transfer. Attackers seek to inject code into a program to make use of its privileges or to extract data from its memory space. Before executable code was commonly made read-only, an attacker could arbitrarily change the code as it is run, targeting direct transfers or even do with no transfers at all. After W^X became widespread, an attacker wants to instead redirect execution to a separate, unprotected area containing the code to be run, making use of indirect transfers: one could overwrite the virtual table for a forward-edge attack or change the call stack for a backward-edge attack (return-oriented programming). CFI is designed to protect indirect transfers from going to unintended locations. == Techniques == Associated techniques include code-pointer separation (CPS), code-pointer integrity (CPI), stack canaries, shadow stacks (SS), and vtable pointer verification. These protections can be classified into either coarse-grained or fine-grained based on the number of targets restricted. A coarse-grained forward-edge CFI implementation, could, for example, restrict the set of indirect call targets to any function that may be indirectly called in the program, while a fine-grained one would restrict each indirect call site to functions that have the same type as the function to be called. Similarly, for a backward edge scheme protecting returns, a coarse-grained implementation would only allow the procedure to return to a function of the same type (of which there could be many, especially for common prototypes), while a fine-grained one would enforce precise return matching (so it can return only to the function that called it). == Implementations == Related implementations are available in Clang (LLVM front-end),, GNU Compiler Collection, Microsoft's Control Flow Guard and Return Flow Guard, Google's Indirect Function-Call Checks and Reuse Attack Protector (RAP). === LLVM/Clang === The LLVM compiler's C/C++ front-end Clang provides a number of "CFI" schemes that works on the forward edge by checking for errors in virtual tables and type casts. Not all of the schemes are supported on all platforms and most of them, the exception being two "kcfi" schemes intended for low-level kernel software, depends on link-time optimization (LTO) to know what functions are supposed to be called in normal cases. Also provided is a separate "shadow call stack" (SCS) instrumentation pass that defends on the backward edge by checking for call stack modifications, available only for the aarch64 and RISC-V ISAs. And due to use of a shared processor register SCS is only enforceable on certain ABIs or if in other ways it is ensured that any other software using the register set (thread/processor) does not interfere with this use. Google has shipped Android with the Linux kernel compiled by Clang with link-time optimization (LTO) and CFI enabled since 2018. Even though SCS is available for the Linux kernel as an option, and support is also available for Android's system components it is recommended only to enable it for components for which it can be ensured that no third party code is loaded. === GCC === The GNU Compiler Collection implemented a "shadow call stack" compatible with Clang for aarch64 in v12 released in 2022. This feature is primarily intended for building the Linux kernel as support is missing from GCC user space libraries. === Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology === Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) detects compromises to control flow integrity with a shadow stack (SS) and indirect branch tracking (IBT). The kernel must map a region of memory for the shadow stack not writable to user space programs except by special instructions. The shadow stack stores a copy of the return address of each CALL. On a RET, the processor checks if the return address stored in the normal stack and shadow stack are equal. If the addresses are not equal, the processor generates an INT #21 (Control Flow Protection Fault). Indirect branch tracking detects indirect JMP or CALL instructions to unauthorized targets. It is implemented by adding a new internal state machine in the processor. The behavior of indirect JMP and CALL instructions is changed so that they switch the state machine from IDLE to WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH. In the WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH state, the next instruction to be executed is required to be the new ENDBRANCH instruction (ENDBR32 in 32-bit mode or ENDBR64 in 64-bit mode), which changes the internal state machine from WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH back to IDLE. Thus every authorized target of an indirect JMP or CALL must begin with ENDBRANCH. If the processor is in a WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH state (meaning, the previous instruction was an indirect JMP or CALL), and the next instruction is not an ENDBRANCH instruction, the processor generates an INT #21 (Control Flow Protection Fault). On processors not supporting CET indirect branch tracking, ENDBRANCH instructions are interpreted as NOPs and have no effect. === Microsoft Control Flow Guard === Control Flow Guard (CFG) was first released for Windows 8.1 Update 3 (KB3000850) in November 2014. Developers can add CFG to their programs by adding the /guard:cf linker flag before program linking in Visual Studio 2015 or newer. As of Windows 10 Creators Update (Windows 10 version 1703), the Windows kernel is compiled with CFG. The Windows kernel uses Hyper-V to prevent malicious kernel code from overwriting the CFG bitmap. CFG operates by creating a per-process bitmap, where a set bit indicates that the address is a valid destination. Before performing each indirect function call, the application checks if the destination address is in the bitmap. If the destination address is not in the bitmap, the program terminates. This makes it more difficult for an attacker to exploit a use-after-free by replacing an object's contents and then using an indirect function call to execute a payload. ==== Implementation details ==== For all protected indirect function calls, the _guard_check_icall function is called, which performs the following steps: Convert the target address to an offset and bit number in the bitmap. The highest 3 bytes are the byte offset in the bitmap The bit offset is a 5-bit value. The first four bits are the 4th through 8th low-order bits of the address. The 5th bit of the bit offset is set to 0 if the destination address is aligned with 0x10 (last four bits are 0), and 1 if it is not. Examine the target's address value in the bitmap If the target address is in the bitmap, return without an error. If the target address is not in the bitmap, terminate the program. ==== Bypass techniques ==== There are several generic techniques for bypassing CFG: Set the destination to code located in a non-CFG module loaded in the same process. Find an indirect call that was not protected by CFG (either CALL or JMP). Use a function call with a different number of arguments than the call is designed for, causing a stack misalignment, and code execution after the function returns (patched in Windows 10). Use a function call with the same number of arguments, but one of pointers passed is treated as an object and writes to a pointer-based offset, allowing overwriting a return address. Overwrite the function call used by the CFG to validate the address (patched in March 2015) Set the CFG bitmap to all 1's, allowing all indirect function calls Use a controlled-write primitive to overwrite an address on the stack (since the stack is not protected by CFG) === Microsoft eXtended Flow Guard === eXtended Flow Guard (XFG) has not been officially released yet, but is available in the Windows Insider preview and was publicly presented at Bluehat Shanghai in 2019. XFG extends CFG by validating function call signatures to ensure that indirect function calls are only to the subset of functions with the same signature. Function call signature validation is implemented by adding instructions to store the target function's hash in register r10 immediately prior to the indirect call and storing the calculated function hash in the memory immediately preceding the target address's code. When the indirect call is made, the XFG validation function compares the value in r10 to the target

  Read more →
• 

  Out-of-band control

  Out-of-band control is a method used by network protocols for sending control information (commands, logins, or session signals) separately from the main data, improving reliability and preventing interference. File Transfer Protocol (FTP) employs an out-of-band approach, using one connection for control commands, like logging in or requesting files, and a separate connection for transferring the files themselves.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media background check

  A social media background check is an investigative technique that involves scrutinizing the social media profiles and activities of individuals, primarily for pre-employment screening and other official verifications. These checks are performed to review people's online behavioral history on social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Social media background checks have become a common part of recruitment processes, among other verification procedures. == History == In the early 21st century, with the rapid expansion of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, employers began to use these channels to gather additional information about prospective employees. Initially, social media background checks were an informal aspect of recruitment, but they have gradually gained formal recognition as a crucial element in candidate screening. Proponents of social media background checks argue that such reviews provide insight into a candidate's professional interests and networks, though the reliability of such assessments remains contested among researchers. == Rise in society == The practice of social media background checks has seen a significant surge in the last decade. This rise can be attributed to the exponential increase in social media users and the growing awareness among organizations regarding the importance of hiring individuals who align with their values and culture. Various platforms provide services explicitly designed to conduct social media background checks efficiently, simplifying the process for businesses. Companies providing social media background check services, such as Ferretly and Certn, have received venture capital funding, reflecting investor interest in the sector. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into conducting AI-powered social media background checks also illustrates its continued popularity and that businesses are looking to ramp up and even automate their use. High-profile cases in which individuals faced employment or admission consequences for past social media posts have raised awareness of social media background checking practices. For example, director James Gunn faced termination from Marvel Studios in 2018 over past offensive tweets, though he was later rehired. Additionally, multiple college admissions officers have acknowledged reviewing applicants' social media profiles, though such practices vary by institution. == Evolution of ethical considerations == Social media background checks are not without controversy, raising significant ethical considerations that have evolved in recent years. Privacy advocates argue that social media background checks raise concerns about data use and discrimination, particularly given the use of personal information that may not reflect job-relevant behavior. Legal scholars debate whether reviewing publicly posted information constitutes a privacy violation under U.S. law. Researchers and critics note that social media profiles often present curated representations of users' lives and may not reflect workplace behavior or professional competence. Moreover, the accuracy of social media background checks has been called into question, with critics pointing out that these checks may not always yield reliable or comprehensive results. Critics also warn about potential misuse of information obtained from social media, including cyberbullying and harassment. A 2023 study by found that approximately 90% of employers incorporate social media into hiring processes, with over half of those surveyed reporting they had rejected candidates based on social media content. This informal approach operates largely outside federal compliance frameworks. Critics argue that without regulation, candidates lack dispute mechanisms available under regulatory frameworks like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires compliance when background checks formally influence employment decisions. In a hiring environment where the practice is already performed often on an individual basis, the introduction of systematic, regulated screening practices that meet federal compliance standards can present a better, fairer alternative for both employers and candidates. == Business considerations == From a business perspective, social media background checks can be a valuable tool in protecting an organization's reputation and maintaining a safe and respectful workplace environment. A well-conducted social media background check can identify potential red flags, helping to prevent instances of workplace harassment or other negative behaviors. However, businesses also face potential legal repercussions if social media background checks are conducted improperly, such as non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in the United States. Critics argue that over-reliance on social media data may exclude qualified candidates whose professional competence is not reflected in their online presence. The proliferation of social media screening services has prompted legal and industry experts to emphasize the importance of compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and relevant state privacy laws when conducting such checks.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media use in education

  Social media in education is the use of social media to enhance education. Social media are "a group of Internet-based applications...that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content". It is also known as the read/write web. As time went on and technology evolved, social media has been an integral part of people's lives, including students, scholars, and teachers. However, social media are controversial because, in addition to providing new means of connection, critics claim that they damage self-esteem, shorten attention spans, and increase mental health issues. A 2016 dissertation presented surveys that focused on the impact of social media. It reported that 54.6% of students believed that social media affected their studies positively (38% agree, 16.6% strongly agree). About 40% disagreed, and 4.7% of students strongly disagreed. 53% of female students reported that social media negatively impacted their studies. Among male students, 40% agreed that social media had a negative impact on studies, while 59% disagreed. A 2023 article dives deep into the rewards system of the brain in response to social media. This study compares the social rewards system in our brain to those from social media. From ages 10-12, most are receiving a cell phone, social rewards in the brain start to feel more satisfying. Leading to adulthood, the effects of social rewards are less likely to feel reliant on feedback from peers. Equivalent to a more mature prefrontal cortex, this enables a better management of their emotional reaction to these social rewards, meaning a more balanced and controlled reaction. == History == A survey from Cambridge International of nearly 20,000 teachers and students (ages 12–19) from 100 countries found that 48% of students use a desktop computer in class, 42% uses phones, 33% use interactive whiteboards and 20% use tablets. Desktop computers are more used than tablets. Teachers were abandoning the "no phones at school" rule. A 2024 research survey through Common Sense Education reported 54% of age 8-12 and 69% of ages 13-18 social media is an extensive distraction from homework. === United States === The long-running technology boom accelerated after the millennium. As of 2018, 95% of US teenage students had access to a smartphone and 45% said they were online almost constantly. In the early days of social media, access to technology was a significant issue as many students did not own not compatible devices and school budgets were often insufficient to purchase devices for student use. Despite backlash, Missouri passed a law that prohibited teachers from communicating privately with students over social media in 2011. Supporters were concerned that online communication between underage students and faculty could lead to inappropriate relationships. Some schools adopted a "Bring Your Own Device" (BYOD) policy, allowing students to bring Internet-accessing devices, such as phones or tablets to class. During the pandemic, the federal government offered funds that allowed more schools to purchase devices. Over time, more students acquired phones with social media access. Personal devices increased student satisfaction, but reduced teachers' ability to control device use in their classrooms. A 2018 Pew Research study reported that 95% of teenagers had a phone and used social media consistently. === Canada === The Peel District School Board (PDSB) in Ontario accepted the use of social media in the classroom. In 2013, the PDSB introduced BYOD and unblocked many social media sites. That was later replaced by a policy that dealt specifically with social media. == Uses == === Classroom === In the classroom, social media offers a way to systematically distribute and gather information from students. Teachers can supply documents, and audio/video media to students for immediate or later use. One study on higher education reported that devices and social media: created opportunities for interaction provided occasions for collaboration sped up information access offered more ways to learn situated learning. Frustrations included anti-technology instructors, device challenges, and devices as a distraction. Social media in classrooms can have a negative effect. A Yale University publication reported that students who used laptops in class for non-academic reasons had poorer performance. Students spent most of their time on social media, shopping, and other personal activities. Social media has helped many educators mentor their students more effectively. === Outside of class === Social media offer a venue for video calls, stories, feeds, and game playing that can enhance the learning process. Teachers can utilize social media to communicate with their students. Social media can provide students with resources that they can utilize in essays, projects, and presentations. Students can easily access comments made by teachers and peers and offer feedback to teachers. Social media can offer students the opportunity to collaborate by sharing information without requiring face to face meetings. Social media can allow students to more easily connect with experts, to go beyond course materials. Instructors in a 2010 study reported that online technologies (social media) can help students become comfortable having discussions outside the classroom better than traditional means. Teachers may face some risk when using social media outside the classroom, without appropriate work rules. Studies explores how college students' engagement with social media platforms influences their communication preferences and habits, particularly in relation to using school email for academic purposes. === Professional development === Social media can aid professional development, as teachers become students, enhancing knowledge transfer, skill master, and collaboration. === Non-academic uses === Schools can use social media to make public announcements. Teachers and administrators can communicate other important information to parents and students and to receive feedback from them. Families can keep up with school events and policies. === Ecology education === The potential of using social media in ecological, nature and forest education include: virtual nature groups can help promote good habits in forest tourism and recreation (nature ethics), by entering general rules in the regulations by administrators, e.g. "DO NOT PICK UP PLANTS UNKNOWN TO US", which is to protects rare species from pointless picking. social media activity motivates people to learn about nature in the field, allows them to gain knowledge, dispels popular myths, enables contact with scientists and practitioners, promotes valuable literature, websites, and at the same time reveals distortions and substantive errors in popular news services. contact is not only virtual. Despite financial barriers and distance, Internet users organize nature conventions. Such meetings are an opportunity not only to make friends, but also to learn about nature together and have fun. the possibility of contact between scientists and nature lovers via Facebook has become a source of cooperation in species inventory, e.g. the online campaign of the NATRIX Herpetological Society, which consists not only of collecting reports of observations of the smooth snake by Internet users, but also of drawing attention to the biology and threats to this species. Social media has become a place where ecology education quickly reaches people of different ages and social statuses. The nature groups that have been created, in which nature lovers, biologists, foresters and scientists participate, can have a real impact on the state of knowledge and data collection through citizen science. == Apps and services == Social media can allow students to participate in their field by working with organizations outside the classroom. By offering easier access to peers outside the classroom, students can broaden their perspectives and find support resources. Social media aided learning outside of the classroom through collaboration and innovation. One specific study, "Exploring education-related use of social media," called this "audience connectors". Audience connectors bring students together while studying with WhatsApp and Facebook. This study reported that "60 percent [of students in the study] agreed that technology changes education for the better." While social media can promote a beneficial education platform, downsides exist. Students may become skilled at "lifting material from the internet" rather than enhancing their personal understanding. Another downside is student attention spans decline. A concern raised by the students of this study showed how many use spell-check as a crutch and will see a trend of points taken off when spell-check is not an option. Apps like X allowed teachers to make classroom accounts where students can learn about social media in a controlled context. Teachers can post assignments on th

  Read more →
• 

  Human–robot collaboration

  Human-Robot Collaboration is the study of collaborative processes in human and robot agents work together to achieve shared goals. Many new applications for robots require them to work alongside people as capable members of human-robot teams. These include robots for homes, hospitals, and offices, space exploration and manufacturing. Human-Robot Collaboration (HRC) is an interdisciplinary research area comprising classical robotics, human-computer interaction, artificial intelligence, process design, layout planning, ergonomics, cognitive sciences, and psychology. Industrial applications of human-robot collaboration involve Collaborative Robots, or cobots, that physically interact with humans in a shared workspace to complete tasks such as collaborative manipulation or object handovers. == Collaborative Activity == Collaboration is defined as a special type of coordinated activity, one in which two or more agents work jointly with each other, together performing a task or carrying out the activities needed to satisfy a shared goal. The process typically involves shared plans, shared norms and mutually beneficial interactions. Although collaboration and cooperation are often used interchangeably, collaboration differs from cooperation as it involves a shared goal and joint action where the success of both parties depend on each other. For effective human-robot collaboration, it is imperative that the robot is capable of understanding and interpreting several communication mechanisms similar to the mechanisms involved in human-human interaction. The robot must also communicate its own set of intents and goals to establish and maintain a set of shared beliefs and to coordinate its actions to execute the shared plan. In addition, all team members demonstrate commitment to doing their own part, to the others doing theirs, and to the success of the overall task. == Theories Informing Human-Robot Collaboration == Human-human collaborative activities are studied in depth in order to identify the characteristics that enable humans to successfully work together. These activity models usually aim to understand how people work together in teams, how they form intentions and achieve a joint goal. Theories on collaboration inform human-robot collaboration research to develop efficient and fluent collaborative agents. === Belief Desire Intention Model === The belief-desire-intention (BDI) model is a model of human practical reasoning that was originally developed by Michael Bratman. The approach is used in intelligent agents research to describe and model intelligent agents. The BDI model is characterized by the implementation of an agent's beliefs (the knowledge of the world, state of the world), desires (the objective to accomplish, desired end state) and intentions (the course of actions currently under execution to achieve the desire of the agent) in order to deliberate their decision-making processes. BDI agents are able to deliberate about plans, select plans and execute plans. === Shared Cooperative Activity === Shared Cooperative Activity defines certain prerequisites for an activity to be considered shared and cooperative: mutual responsiveness, commitment to the joint activity and commitment to mutual support. An example case to illustrate these concepts would be a collaborative activity where agents are moving a table out the door, mutual responsiveness ensures that movements of the agents are synchronized; a commitment to the joint activity reassures each team member that the other will not at some point drop his side; and a commitment to mutual support deals with possible breakdowns due to one team member's inability to perform part of the plan. === Joint Intention Theory === Joint Intention Theory proposes that for joint action to emerge, team members must communicate to maintain a set of shared beliefs and to coordinate their actions towards the shared plan. In collaborative work, agents should be able to count on the commitment of other members, therefore each agent should inform the others when they reach the conclusion that a goal is achievable, impossible, or irrelevant. == Approaches to Human-Robot Collaboration == The approaches to human-robot collaboration include human emulation (HE) and human complementary (HC) approaches. Although these approaches have differences, there are research efforts to develop a unified approach stemming from potential convergences such as Collaborative Control. === Human Emulation === The human emulation approach aims to enable computers to act like humans or have human-like abilities in order to collaborate with humans. It focuses on developing formal models of human-human collaboration and applying these models to human-computer collaboration. In this approach, humans are viewed as rational agents who form and execute plans for achieving their goals and infer other people's plans. Agents are required to infer the goals and plans of other agents, and collaborative behavior consists of helping other agents to achieve their goals. === Human Complementary === The human complementary approach seeks to improve human-computer interaction by making the computer a more intelligent partner that complements and collaborates with humans. The premise is that the computer and humans have fundamentally asymmetric abilities. Therefore, researchers invent interaction paradigms that divide responsibility between human users and computer systems by assigning distinct roles that exploit the strengths and overcome the weaknesses of both partners. == Key Aspects == Specialization of Roles: Based on the level of autonomy and intervention, there are several human-robot relationships including master-slave, supervisor–subordinate, partner–partner, teacher–learner and fully autonomous robot. In addition to these roles, homotopy (a weighting function that allows a continuous change between leader and follower behaviors) was introduced as a flexible role distribution. Establishing shared goal(s): Through direct discussion about goals or inference from statements and actions, agents must determine the shared goals they are trying to achieve. Allocation of Responsibility and Coordination: Agents must decide how to achieve their goals, determine what actions will be done by each agent, and how to coordinate the actions of individual agents and integrate their results. Shared context: Agents must be able to track progress toward their goals. They must keep track of what has been achieved and what remains to be done. They must evaluate the effects of actions and determine whether an acceptable solution has been achieved. Communication: Any collaboration requires communication to define goals, negotiate over how to proceed and who will do what, and evaluate progress and results. Adaptation and learning: Collaboration over time require partners to adapt themselves to each other and learn from one's partner both directly or indirectly. Time and space: The time-space taxonomy divides human-robot interaction into four categories based on whether the humans and robots are using computing systems at the same time (synchronous) or different times (asynchronous) and while in the same place (collocated) or in different places (non-collocated). Ergonomics: Human factors and ergonomics are one of the key aspects for a sustainable human-robot collaboration. The robot control system can use biomechanical models and sensors to optimize various ergonomic metrics, such as muscle fatigue.

  Read more →
• 

  Social media use by businesses

  Social media use by businesses includes a range of applications. Although social media accessed via desktop computers offer an online shopping variety of opportunities for companies in a wide range of business sectors, mobile social media, which users can access when they are "on the go" via tablet computers or smartphones, benefit companies because of the location- and time-sensitive awareness of their users. Mobile social media tools can be used for marketing research, communication, sales promotions/discounts, informal employee learning/organizational development, relationship development/loyalty programs, and e-commerce. Marketing research: Mobile social media applications provide companies data about offline consumer movements at a level of detail that was previously accessible to online companies only. These applications allow any business to know the exact time a customer who uses social media entered one of its locations, as well as know the social media comments made during the visit. Communication: Mobile social media communication takes two forms: company-to-consumer (in which a company may establish a connection to a consumer based on its location and provide reviews about locations nearby) and user-generated content. For example, McDonald's offered $5 and $10 gift-cards to 100 users randomly selected among those checking in at one of its restaurants. This promotion increased check-ins by 33% (from 2,146 to 2,865), resulted in over 50 articles and blog posts, and prompted several hundred thousand news feeds and Twitter messages. Sales promotions and discounts: Although customers have had to use printed coupons in the past, mobile social media allows companies to tailor promotions to specific users at specific times. For example, when launching its California-Cancun service, Virgin America offered users who checked in through Loopt at one of three designated taco trucks in San Francisco or Los Angeles between 11 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 31 August 2010, two tacos for $1 and two flights to Cancun or Cabo for the price of one. This special promotion was only available to people who were at a certain location at a certain time. Relationship development and loyalty programs: In order to increase long-term relationships with customers, companies can develop loyalty programs that allow customers who check-in via social media regularly at a location to earn discounts or perks. For example, American Eagle Outfitters remunerates such customers with a tiered 10%, 15%, or 20% discount on their total purchase. Informal employee learning/organizational development is facilitated by social media. Technologies such as blogs, wiki pages, web forums, social networks and other social media act as technology enhanced learning (TEL) tools, and their users perceive change in organizational structure, culture and knowledge management. The prerequisite for the successful use of social media are motivated employees who want to use the new technologies. It is central for companies to understand the factors that determine the willingness to use social media. Customer service and support: A company can gain cost savings and increase revenue and customer satisfaction by using social media platforms in customer service and support. By using social media tools, company's have easy and widescale contact to its customers and simultaneously increase their brand knowledge. E-commerce: Social media sites are increasingly implementing marketing-friendly strategies, creating platforms that are mutually beneficial for users, businesses, and the networks themselves in the popularity and accessibility of e-commerce, or online purchases. The user who posts their comments about a company's product or service benefits because they are able to share their views with their online friends and acquaintances. The company benefits because it obtains insight (positive or negative) about how their product or service is viewed by consumers. Mobile social media applications such as Amazon.com and Pinterest have started to influence an upward trend in the popularity and accessibility of e-commerce. E-commerce businesses may refer to social media as consumer-generated media (CGM). A common thread running through all definitions of social media is a blending of technology and social interaction for the co-creation of value for the business or organization that is using it. People obtain valuable information, education, news, and other data from electronic and print media. Social media are distinct from industrial and traditional media such as newspapers, magazines, television, and film as they are comparatively inexpensive marketing tools and are highly accessible. They enable anyone, including private individuals, to publish or access information easily. Industrial media generally require significant resources to publish information, and in most cases the articles go through many revisions before being published. This process adds to the cost and the resulting market price. Originally social media was only used by individuals, but now it is used by both businesses and nonprofit organizations and also in government and politics. One characteristic shared by both social and industrial media is the capability to reach small or large audiences; for example, either a blog post or a television show may reach no people or millions of people. Some of the properties that help describe the differences between social and industrial media are: Quality: In industrial (traditional) publishing—mediated by a publisher—the typical range of quality is substantially narrower (skewing to the high quality side) than in niche, unmediated markets like user-generated social media posts. The main challenge posed by the content in social media sites is the fact that the distribution of quality has high variance: from very high-quality items to low-quality, sometimes even abusive or inappropriate content. Reach: Both industrial and social media technologies provide scale and are capable of reaching a global audience. Industrial media, however, typically use a centralized framework for organization, production, and dissemination, whereas social media are by their very nature more decentralized, less hierarchical, and distinguished by multiple points of production and utility. Frequency: The number of times users access a type of media per day. Heavy social media users, such as young people, check their social media account numerous times throughout the day. Accessibility: The means of production for industrial media are typically government or corporate (privately owned); social media tools are generally available to the public at little or no cost, or they are supported by advertising revenue. While social media tools are available to anyone with access to Internet and a computer or mobile device, due to the digital divide, the poorest segment of the population lacks access to the Internet and computer. Low-income people may have more access to traditional media (TV, radio, etc.), as an inexpensive TV and aerial or radio costs much less than an inexpensive computer or mobile device. Moreover, in many regions, TV or radio owners can tune into free over the air programming; computer or mobile device owners need Internet access to go to social media sites. Usability: Industrial media production typically requires specialized skills and training. For example, in the 1970s, to record a pop song, an aspiring singer would have to rent time in an expensive professional recording studio and hire an audio engineer. Conversely, most social media activities, such as posting a video of oneself singing a song require only modest reinterpretation of existing skills (assuming a person understands Web 2.0 technologies); in theory, anyone with access to the Internet can operate the means of social media production, and post digital pictures, videos or text online. Immediacy: The time lag between communications produced by industrial media can be long (days, weeks, or even months, by the time the content has been reviewed by various editors and fact checkers) compared to social media (which can be capable of virtually instantaneous responses). The immediacy of social media can be seen as a strength, in that it enables regular people to instantly communicate their opinions and information. At the same time, the immediacy of social media can also be seen as a weakness, as the lack of fact checking and editorial "gatekeepers" facilitates the circulation of hoaxes and fake news. Permanence: Industrial media, once created, cannot be altered (e.g., once a magazine article or paper book is printed and distributed, changes cannot be made to that same article in that print run) whereas social media posts can be altered almost instantaneously, when the user decides to edit their post or due to comments from other readers. Community media constitute a hybrid of industrial and social media. Though community-owned, some community radio,

  Read more →
• 

  Instagram face

  Instagram face is a beauty standard based on the filters and influencers popular on Instagram. == Overview == An "Instagram face" has catlike eyes, long lashes, a small nose, high cheekbones, full lips, and a blank expression. Digital filters manipulate photographs and video to create an idealized image that, according to critics, has resulted in an unrealistic and homogeneous beauty standard. According to Jia Tolentino, the face is "distinctly white but ambiguously ethnic". The face has been described as a racial composite of different peoples. In 2024, cosmetic surgeon Paul Banwell said, "People used to come to see me asking to look like a particular celebrity, but many patients come to me now wanting to look like the filtered version of themselves." While based on digital filters, the look is achieved in person using heavy applications of makeup or cosmetic surgery. Plastic surgery, Botox injections, and injectable filler have significantly increased in popularity since the rise of digital filters. Influencers market makeup products designed to recreate the look. == History == The growth of reality television series and social media throughout the 2010s has influenced the popularity of Instagram face. In 2019, The New Yorker referred to this phenomenon as "Instagram Face," identifying Kim Kardashian as its "patient zero." Similarly, her younger sister Kylie Jenner significantly impacted the trend with her 2015 lip filler confession, which acted as a catalyst, introducing Juvéderm to a new generation. Sirin Kale of Vice News has described Jenner as "at the vanguard of an aesthetic that’s swept through British towns and cities," while also pointing towards other celebrities such as Iggy Azalea and Farrah Abraham. In 2018, Americans underwent 7 million neurotoxin injections and 2.5 million filler injections and spent $16.5 billion on cosmetic surgery. 92% of the latter was performed on women. Botox usage has also been on the rise. == Criticism == In her 2021 book The Selfie, Temporality, and Contemporary Photography, Claire Raymond of Princeton University criticised "Instagram faces" for erasing "heritable quirks and lived history; it erases what makes the human face so compelling, whether conventionally beautiful or not," while also arguing that the procedures used to create Instagram faces "numb and freeze the face and skin, rendering less mobile the lips, the eyes, and the neck. Numbness is the central feature of the experience for the woman who gets Instagram face through cosmetic procedures. Others may see her more, but she feels less and less." == Influence on popular culture == The increasing popularity of cosmetic surgeries towards a homogeneous ideal has resulted in the emergence of the "goopcore" sub-genre of body horror. The sub-genre combines graphic violence with body modifications from the beauty industry. Allie Rowbottom's goopcore novel Aesthetica centers around an influencer attempting to undo years of plastic surgery with a new experimental procedure.

  Read more →
• 

  Memory-hard function

  In cryptography, a memory-hard function (MHF) is a function that costs a significant amount of memory to efficiently evaluate. It differs from a memory-bound function, which incurs cost by slowing down computation through memory latency. MHFs have found use in key stretching and proof of work as their increased memory requirements significantly reduce the computational efficiency advantage of custom hardware over general-purpose hardware compared to non-MHFs. == Introduction == MHFs are designed to consume large amounts of memory on a computer in order to reduce the effectiveness of parallel computing. In order to evaluate the function using less memory, a significant time penalty is incurred. As each MHF computation requires a large amount of memory, the number of function computations that can occur simultaneously is limited by the amount of available memory. This reduces the efficiency of specialised hardware, such as application-specific integrated circuits and graphics processing units, which utilise parallelisation, in computing a MHF for a large number of inputs, such as when brute-forcing password hashes or mining cryptocurrency. == Motivation and examples == Bitcoin's proof-of-work uses repeated evaluation of the SHA-256 function, but modern general-purpose processors, such as off-the-shelf CPUs, are inefficient when computing a fixed function many times over. Specialized hardware, such as application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) designed for Bitcoin mining, can use 30,000 times less energy per hash than x86 CPUs whilst having much greater hash rates. This led to concerns about the centralization of mining for Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Because of this inequality between miners using ASICs and miners using CPUs or off-the shelf hardware, designers of later proof-of-work systems utilised hash functions for which it was difficult to construct ASICs that could evaluate the hash function significantly faster than a CPU. As memory cost is platform-independent, MHFs have found use in cryptocurrency mining, such as for Litecoin, which uses scrypt as its hash function. They are also useful in password hashing because they significantly increase the cost of trying many possible passwords against a leaked database of hashed passwords without significantly increasing the computation time for legitimate users. == Measuring memory hardness == There are various ways to measure the memory hardness of a function. One commonly seen measure is cumulative memory complexity (CMC). In a parallel model, CMC is the sum of the memory required to compute a function over every time step of the computation. Other viable measures include integrating memory usage against time and measuring memory bandwidth consumption on a memory bus. Functions requiring high memory bandwidth are sometimes referred to as "bandwidth-hard functions". == Variants == MHFs can be categorized into two different groups based on their evaluation patterns: data-dependent memory-hard functions (dMHF) and data-independent memory-hard functions (iMHF). As opposed to iMHFs, the memory access pattern of a dMHF depends on the function input, such as the password provided to a key derivation function. Examples of dMHFs are scrypt and Argon2d, while examples of iMHFs are Argon2i and catena. Many of these MHFs have been designed to be used as password hashing functions because of their memory hardness. A notable problem with dMHFs is that they are prone to side-channel attacks such as cache timing. This has resulted in a preference for using iMHFs when hashing passwords. However, iMHFs have been mathematically proven to have weaker memory hardness properties than dMHFs.

  Read more →
• 

  LTX (text-to-video model)

  LTX is a family of open source artificial intelligence video foundation models developed by Lightricks, and first released in November 2024. The latest models, LTX-2, create videos based on user prompts. They were preceded by LTX Video, which was released in 2024 as the company's first text-to-video model. LTX-2 is part of the LTX family of video generation models, which form the core technology, alongside LTX Studio, of the LTX ecosystem. == History == === Origins: LTX Video (2024–2025) === In November 2024 Lightricks publicly released its first text-to-video model, LTX Video. It was a 2-billion parameter model, available as open source. In May 2025 Lightricks launched LTXV-13b, a version with 13-billion parameters. Two months later, the model broke the 60 second barrier for generated video. === Release of LTX-2 (2025) === In October 2025 Lightricks announced its latest model, and renamed it LTX-2. The model was described as capable of generating synchronized audio and video at native 4K resolution and up to 50 frames per second (fps), using a variety of conditions and prompts, including text-to-video and image-to-video. Google highlighted the fact that LTX-2 was trained on its infrastructure, and saying it was "The first open source AI video generation model, powered by Google Cloud". Upon its release it was ranked in the top-3 models for image-to-video creation by Artificial Analysis, behind Kling 3.5 by Kling AI and Veo 3.1 by Google. Its text-to-image option was ranked 7th. In addition to its open-source release, Lightricks offers API access to LTX-2, allowing developers to generate videos from text and image prompts through a hosted service without running the model locally. === Open Source Release (2026) === In January 2026, Lightricks officially released the full open-source version of LTX-2, making the model’s complete codebase, weights, and associated tooling publicly available. In March 2026 the company released LTX-2.3, which was accompanied by a desktop video editor enabling the entire model to run locally on consumer hardware. == Technical features == === Advancements over LTX Video === LTX-2 builds upon the LTX Video architecture with several major improvements: Unified audio-video generation producing synchronized dialogue, ambience, and motion Native 4K rendering 50-fps output for cinematic motion Three operational modes (Fast, Pro, Ultra) More efficient diffusion pipelines enabling high fidelity on consumer GPUs === Core capabilities === Text-to-video generation Image-to-video generation Multimodal audiovisual synthesis High-resolution spatial and temporal coherence Configurable quality/performance settings Open-source distribution of weights and datasets == Reception == Initial reception to LTX-2 was broadly positive, with several technology and media outlets highlighting its open-source approach and multimodal capabilities. Open Source For You described LTX-2 as “one of the first AI video systems to combine 4K output, synchronized audio, and an open model release,” noting that it positioned Lightricks as a significant competitor to proprietary systems such as OpenAI's Sora and Google's Veo. IEA Green said that the model “could rewrite the AI filmmaking game,” emphasizing that its 50-fps rendering and unified audio-video generation made it suitable for professional studios and independent creators alike. AI News characterized LTX-2 as a “major step forward in the democratization of cinematic-quality video generation,” praising its consumer-grade hardware efficiency and multi-tier generation modes, while also noting ongoing challenges in long-form temporal stability. FinancialContent reported strong interest among creative agencies, attributing the attention to Lightricks’ decision to release model weights and datasets, which reviewers said enabled “a level of transparency not typically seen in commercial AI video models.” === Benchmarks and rankings === Upon release, LTX-2 ranked third for image-to-video creation in the Artificial Analysis benchmark, behind Kling 3.5 and Veo 3.1, while its text-to-video option ranked seventh. As of early 2026, it was the highest-ranked open-source model in the benchmark. === Limitations === Some early reviewers also pointed out quality limitations. The Ray3 technical review noted occasional inconsistencies in lip-sync and motion tracking during long scenes, though it stated these were “in line with the challenges faced by all current AI video diffusion models” and expected to improve with continued iteration. Like other diffusion-based video generators, LTX-2 can produce artifacts in complex multi-person scenes and may struggle with precise text rendering within generated video.

  Read more →
• 

  Social bot

  A social bot, refers to fully or partially automated social media accounts designed to perform most regular users’ actions, such as liking, posting content, and chatting with other users. Although their levels of autonomy vary, and often include a human-in-the-loop, social bots can use artificial intelligence to perform social media actions and can use large language models to mimic human dialogue. Social bots can operate alone or in groups that coordinate messaging as part of a network of coordinated inauthentic behavior. Social bots are often used to perform ad fraud by artificially boosting viewership and engagement metrics and to spread disinformation on social media. == Uses == Social bots are used for a large number of purposes on a variety of social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. One common use of social bots is to inflate a social media user's apparent popularity, usually by artificially manipulating their engagement metrics with large volumes of fake likes, reposts, or replies. Social bots can similarly be used to artificially inflate a user's follower count with fake followers, creating a false perception of a larger and more influential online following than is the case. The use of social bots to create the impression of a large social media influence allows individuals, brands, and organizations to attract a higher number of human followers and boost their online presence. Fake engagement can be bought and sold in the black market of social media engagement. Corporations typically use automated customer service agents on social media to affordably manage high levels of support requests. Social bots are used to send automated responses to users’ questions, sometimes prompting the user to private message the support account with additional information. The increased use of automated support bots and virtual assistants has led to some companies laying off customer-service staff. Social bots are also often used to influence public opinion. Autonomous bot accounts can flood social media with large numbers of posts expressing support for certain products, companies, or political campaigns, creating the impression of organic grassroots support. This can create a false perception of the number of people who support a certain position, which may also have effects on the direction of stock prices or on elections. Messages with similar content can also influence fads or trends. Many social bots are also used to amplify phishing attacks. These malicious bots are used to trick a social media user into giving up their passwords or other personal data. This is usually accomplished by posting links claiming to direct users to news articles that would in actuality direct to malicious websites containing malware. Scammers often use URL shortening services such as TinyURL and bit.ly to disguise a link's domain address, increasing the likelihood of a user clicking the malicious link. The presence of fake social media followers and high levels of engagement help convince the victim that the scammer is in fact a trusted user. Social bots can be a tool for computational propaganda. Bots can also be used for algorithmic curation, algorithmic radicalization, and/or influence-for-hire, a term that refers to the selling of an account on social media platforms. == History == Bots have coexisted with computer technology since the earliest days of computing. Social bots have their roots in the 1950s with Alan Turing, whose work focused on machine intelligence with the development of the Turing Test. The following decades saw further progress made towards the goal of creating programs capable of mimicking human behavior, notably with Joseph Weizenbaum’s creation of ELIZA. Considered to be one of the first Chatbots, ELIZA could simulate natural conversations with human users through pattern matching. Its most famous script was DOCTOR, a simulation of a Rogerian psychotherapist that was programmed to chat with patients and respond to questions. With the growth of social media platforms in the early 2000s, these bots could be used to interact with much larger user groups in an inconspicuous manner. Early instances of autonomous agents on social media could be found on sites like MySpace, with social bots being used by marketing firms to inflate activity on a user’s page in an effort to make them appear more popular. Social bots have been observed on a large variety of social media websites, with Twitter being one of the most widely observed examples. The creation of Twitter bots is generally against the site’s terms of service when used to post spam or to automatically like and follow other users, but some degree of automation using Twitter’s API may be permitted if used for “entertainment, informational, or novelty purposes.” Other platforms such as Reddit and Discord also allow for the use of social bots as long as they are not used to violate policies regarding harmful content and abusive behavior. Social media platforms have developed their own automated tools to filter out messages that come from bots, although they cannot detect all bot messages. == Legal regulation == Due to the difficulty of recognizing social bots and separating them from "eligible" automation via social media APIs, it is unclear how legal regulation can be enforced. Social bots are expected to play a role in shaping public opinion by autonomously acting as influencers. Some social bots have been used to rapidly spread misinformation, manipulate stock markets, influence opinion on companies and brands, promote political campaigns, and engage in malicious phishing campaigns. In the United States, some states have started to implement legislation in an attempt to regulate the use of social bots. In 2019, California passed the Bolstering Online Transparency Act (the B.O.T. Act) to make it unlawful to use automated software to appear indistinguishable from humans for the purpose of influencing a social media user's purchasing and voting decisions. Other states such as Utah and Colorado have passed similar bills to restrict the use of social bots. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) in the European Union is the first comprehensive law governing the use of Artificial Intelligence. The law requires transparency in AI to prevent users from being tricked into believing they are communicating with another human. AI-generated content on social media must be clearly marked as such, preventing social bots from using AI in a manner that mimics human behavior. == Detection == The first generation of bots could sometimes be distinguished from real users by their often superhuman capacities to post messages. Later developments have succeeded in imprinting more "human" activity and behavioral patterns in the agent. With enough bots, it might be even possible to achieve artificial social proof. To unambiguously detect social bots as what they are, a variety of criteria must be applied together using pattern detection techniques, some of which are: cartoon figures as user pictures sometimes also random real user pictures are captured (identity fraud) reposting rate temporal patterns sentiment expression followers-to-friends ratio length of user names variability in (re)posted messages engagement rate (like/followers rate) analysis of the time series of social media posts Social bots are always becoming increasingly difficult to detect and understand. The bots' human-like behavior, ever-changing behavior of the bots, and the sheer volume of bots covering every platform may have been a factor in the challenges of removing them. Social media sites, like Twitter, are among the most affected, with CNBC reporting up to 48 million of the 319 million users (roughly 15%) were bots in 2017. Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) is a public Web service that checks the activity of a Twitter account and gives it a score based on how likely the account is to be a bot. The system leverages over a thousand features. An active method for detecting early spam bots was to set up honeypot accounts that post nonsensical content, which may get reposted (retweeted) by the bots. However, bots evolve quickly, and detection methods have to be updated constantly, because otherwise they may get useless after a few years. One method is the use of Benford's Law for predicting the frequency distribution of significant leading digits to detect malicious bots online. This study was first introduced at the University of Pretoria in 2020. Another method is artificial-intelligence-driven detection. Some of the sub-categories of this type of detection would be active learning loop flow, feature engineering, unsupervised learning, supervised learning, and correlation discovery. Some operations of bots work together in a synchronized way. For example, ISIS used Twitter to amplify its Islamic content by numerous orchestrated accounts which further pushed an item to the Hot List news, thus further a

  Read more →
• 

  Interplanetary Internet

  The interplanetary Internet is a conceived computer network in space, consisting of a set of network nodes that can communicate with each other. These nodes are the planet's orbiters and landers, and the Earth ground stations. For example, the orbiters collect the scientific data from the Curiosity rover on Mars through near-Mars communication links, transmit the data to Earth through direct links from the Mars orbiters to the Earth ground stations via the NASA Deep Space Network, and finally the data routed through Earth's internal internet. Interplanetary communication is greatly delayed by interplanetary distances, as data transmission can only go as fast as the speed of light, so a new set of protocols and technologies that are tolerant to large delays and errors are required. The interplanetary Internet has been envisioned as a store and forward network of internets that is often disconnected, has a wireless backbone fraught with error-prone links and delays ranging from tens of minutes to even hours, even when there is a connection. As of 2024 agencies and companies working towards bringing the network to fruition include NASA, ESA, SpaceX and Blue Origin. == Challenges and reasons == In the core implementation of Interplanetary Internet, satellites orbiting a planet communicate to other planet's satellites. Simultaneously, these planets revolve around the Sun with long distances, and thus many challenges face the communications. The reasons and the resultant challenges are: The motion and long distances between planets: The interplanetary communication is greatly delayed due to the interplanetary distances and the motion of the planets. The delay is variable and long, ranging from a couple of minutes (Earth-to-Mars), to a couple of hours (Pluto-to-Earth), depending on their relative positions. The interplanetary communication also suspends due to the solar conjunction, when the sun's radiation hinders the direct communication between the planets. As such, the communication characterizes lossy links and intermittent link connectivity. Low embeddable payload: Satellites can only carry a small payload, which poses challenges to the power, mass, size, and cost for communication hardware design. An asymmetric bandwidth would be the result of this limitation. This asymmetry reaches ratios up to 1000:1 as downlink:uplink bandwidth portion. Absence of fixed infrastructure: The graph of participating nodes in a specific planet-to-planet communication keeps changing over time, due to the constant motion. The routes of the planet-to-planet communication are planned and scheduled rather than being opportunistic. The Interplanetary Internet design must address these challenges to operate successfully and achieve good communication with other planets. It also must use the few available resources efficiently in the system. == Development == Space communication technology has steadily evolved from expensive, one-of-a-kind point-to-point architectures, to the re-use of technology on successive missions, to the development of standard protocols agreed upon by space agencies of many countries. This last phase has gone on since 1982 through the efforts of the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS), a body composed of the major space agencies of the world. It has 11 member agencies, 32 observer agencies, and over 119 industrial associates. The evolution of space data system standards has gone on in parallel with the evolution of the Internet, with conceptual cross-pollination where fruitful, but largely as a separate evolution. Since the late 1990s, familiar Internet protocols and CCSDS space link protocols have integrated and converged in several ways; for example, the successful FTP file transfer to Earth-orbiting STRV 1B on January 2, 1996, which ran FTP over the CCSDS IPv4-like Space Communications Protocol Specifications (SCPS) protocols. Internet Protocol use without CCSDS has taken place on spacecraft, e.g., demonstrations on the UoSAT-12 satellite, and operationally on the Disaster Monitoring Constellation. Having reached the era where networking and IP on board spacecraft have been shown to be feasible and reliable, a forward-looking study of the bigger picture was the next phase. The Interplanetary Internet study at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) was started by a team of scientists at JPL led by internet pioneer Vinton Cerf and the late Adrian Hooke. Cerf was appointed as a distinguished visiting scientist at JPL in 1998, while Hooke was one of the founders and directors of CCSDS. While IP-like SCPS protocols are feasible for short hops, such as ground station to orbiter, rover to lander, lander to orbiter, probe to flyby, and so on, delay-tolerant networking is needed to get information from one region of the Solar System to another. It becomes apparent that the concept of a region is a natural architectural factoring of the Interplanetary Internet. A region is an area where the characteristics of communication are the same. Region characteristics include communications, security, the maintenance of resources, perhaps ownership, and other factors. The Interplanetary Internet is a "network of regional internets". What is needed then, is a standard way to achieve end-to-end communication through multiple regions in a disconnected, variable-delay environment using a generalized suite of protocols. Examples of regions might include the terrestrial Internet as a region, a region on the surface of the Moon or Mars, or a ground-to-orbit region. The recognition of this requirement led to the concept of a "bundle" as a high-level way to address the generalized Store-and-Forward problem. Bundles are an area of new protocol development in the upper layers of the OSI model, above the Transport Layer with the goal of addressing the issue of bundling store-and-forward information so that it can reliably traverse radically dissimilar environments constituting a "network of regional internets". Delay-tolerant networking (DTN) was designed to enable standardized communications over long distances and through time delays. At its core is the Bundle Protocol (BP), which is similar to the Internet Protocol, or IP, that serves as the heart of the Internet here on Earth. The big difference between the regular Internet Protocol (IP) and the Bundle Protocol is that IP assumes a seamless end-to-end data path, while BP is built to account for errors and disconnections — glitches that commonly plague deep-space communications. Bundle Service Layering, implemented as the Bundling protocol suite for delay-tolerant networking, will provide general-purpose delay-tolerant protocol services in support of a range of applications: custody transfer, segmentation and reassembly, end-to-end reliability, end-to-end security, and end-to-end routing among them. The Bundle Protocol was first tested in space on the UK-DMC satellite in 2008. An example of one of these end-to-end applications flown on a space mission is the CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP), used on the Deep Impact comet mission. CFDP is an international standard for automatic, reliable file transfer in both directions. CFDP should not be confused with Coherent File Distribution Protocol, which has the same acronym and is an IETF-documented experimental protocol for rapidly deploying files to multiple targets in a highly networked environment. In addition to reliably copying a file from one entity (such as a spacecraft or ground station) to another entity, CFDP has the capability to reliably transmit arbitrarily small messages defined by the user, in the metadata accompanying the file, and to reliably transmit commands relating to file system management that are to be executed automatically on the remote end-point entity (such as a spacecraft) upon successful reception of a file. == Protocol == The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) packet telemetry standard defines the protocol used for the transmission of spacecraft instrument data over the deep-space channel. Under this standard, an image or other data sent from a spacecraft instrument is transmitted using one or more packets. === CCSDS packet definition === A packet is a block of data with length that can vary between successive packets, ranging from 7 to 65,542 bytes, including the packet header. Packetized data is transmitted via frames, which are fixed-length data blocks. The size of a frame, including frame header and control information, can range up to 2048 bytes. Packet sizes are fixed during the development phase. Because packet lengths are variable but frame lengths are fixed, packet boundaries usually do not coincide with frame boundaries. === Telecom processing notes === Data in a frame is typically protected from channel errors by error-correcting codes. Even when the channel errors exceed the correction capability of the error-correcting code, the presence of errors is nearly always detected by the e

  Read more →
• 

  Forking lemma

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

  Read more →
• 

  Actionstep

  Actionstep is a cloud-based legal practice management software for law firms and compliance-focused businesses. Actionstep is built to be a comprehensive practice management software with features for workflow automation as well as automatic document generation == History == Actionstep was created by Ted Jordan, CEO of Actionstep, in 2004. It was first used commercially in 2005 by a New Zealand construction franchise as well as a law firm. Actionstep soon expanded into central government and a wider range of small business users (mainly in New Zealand and Australia). After a few years the expanse of their legal client base prompted the company to add key legal specific features to the product with the aim of further expanding their legal market. Through Actionstep's tenure as a practice management software they have gradually expanded from their headquarters in New Zealand and offices located in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. In October 2020, private equity firm Serent Capital Partners purchased 84.25% stake in Actionstep. In April 2022, the company announced unlimited annual leave to its staff == Product == The premise of Actionstep is that it saves companies from having to purchase software tailored to their work flow and instead allows companies to modify the program without additional coding.{{Citation needed}} The founder and CEO Ted Jordan used cloud technology to allow the software to be continuously updated without the need to purchase or redesign new software. This theoretically allows businesses to remain current all the time and cut external I.T. costs.{{Citation needed}} Actionstep also integrates with software from other companies, such as Xero accounting, Microsoft Office & Office 365, Gmail, Google Drive, Dropbox, NetDocuments, QuickBooks, LawPay, BundleDocs, Box, HotDocs, Infotrack, GlobalX, PEXA, JOSEF and Zapier. Actionstep contains workflow automation features aimed at increasing office efficiency. These automated processes include automatic task assignment, information collection, document generation & automation, cataloguing, and matter generation. == Awards == Actionstep was named First International Best of SaaS Showplace Award Winner in 2009. Actionstep has also been a finalist in the ComputerWorld Excellence Awards (2007), and the Vero Excellence in Business Support (2010).

  Read more →
• 

  Content repository

  A content repository or content store is a database of digital content with an associated set of data management, search and access methods allowing application-independent access to the content, rather like a digital library, but with the ability to store and modify content in addition to searching and retrieving. The content repository acts as the storage engine for a larger application such as a content management system or a document management system, which adds a user interface on top of the repository's application programming interface. == Advantages provided by repositories == Common rules for data access allow many applications to work with the same content without interrupting the data. They give out signals when changes happen, letting other applications using the repository know that something has been modified, which enables collaborative data management. Developers can deal with data using programs that are more compatible with the desktop programming environment. The data model is scriptable when users use a content repository. == Content repository features == A content repository may provide functionality such as: Add/edit/delete content Hierarchy and sort order management Query / search Versioning Access control Import / export Locking Life-cycle management Retention and holding / records management == Examples == Apache Jackrabbit ModeShape == Applications == Content management Document management Digital asset management Records management Revision control Social collaboration Web content management == Standards and specification == Content repository API for Java WebDAV Content Management Interoperability Services

  Read more →
• 

  Tokenization (data security)

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

  Read more →