The company has named the set of tests Project Wycheproof.
- TLS 1.3 design finalized
- The quest for post-quantum cryptography continues
- New thinking on how to backdoor cryptographic algorithms
- RFC 5114: Another backdoored crypto standard from NIST?
- Cryptographic deniability pops up in the US presidential election
- Attacks only get better
- Out with the old, in with the new: HTTPS still being slowly hardened
Strong non-backdoored encryption is vital – but the Feds should totally be able to crack it, say House committees
The Institute (NIST) has cottoned on to the fact that - If large-scale quantum computers are ever built, they will be able to break many of the public-key cryptosystems currently in use.
The agency therefore observes, in its explanation of the Notice, that once such machines are widely available: This would seriously compromise the confidentiality and integrity of digital communications on the Internet and elsewhere.
The attack is possible because devices connected over Thunderbolt can access the computer's RAM directly before the OS is started through the direct memory access (DMA) feature.
Plain Text, Hashing, Salting, Peppering, Encryption, Hexadecimal
MD5, SHA-1, SHA-2, Bcrypt, PBKDF2, Scrypt
Three US companies have settled with the FTC after they were accused of lying about the security safeguards on their customer information.…
Microsoft DeepCoder AI Produces Its Own Code By Ripping Off Existing Software
The execution works because through deep-learning, and smart AI to make sense of it, pieces of code are taken from existing software, letting the …
Link to Full Article
Students show passion for neuroscience at Brain Bee
A three-pound human super computer was the focus of the Vermont Brain Bee, held Feb. [Link to Full Article]
We are all subject to the genetic lottery. That’s how it’s always been, and for a while, we thought that was how it would always be.
Then, in 2014, a gene-editing technology called CRISPR was introduced. With CRISPR, geneticists could edit sections of the genome to alter, add, or remove parts of the DNA sequence. To date, it is by far the easiest way we’ve found to manipulate the genetic code, and it is already paving the way for more efficient and effective treatments of conditions with a genetic component. However, the technology brings with it the potential to manipulate and remove simply “unwanted” genes.CLICK TO VIEW FULL INFOGRAPHIC
While most of the proposed CRISPR applications are focused on editing somatic (non-reproductive) cells, altering germline (reproductive) cells is also a very real possibility. This prospect of editing germline cells and making changes that would be passed on from generation to generation has sparked a heated ethical debate.
The potential to change someone’s DNA even before they are born has led to claims that CRISPR will be used to create “designer babies.” Detractors were appalled at the hubris of science being used to engineer the human race. Supporters, on the other hand, are saying this ability should be a human right.Rigging the Game
To be fair, most advocates of genetic editing aren’t rallying for support so CRISPR can be used to create a superior human race. Rather, they believe people should have free access to technology that is capable of curing diseases. It’s not about rigging the genetic game — it’s about putting the technique to good use while following a set of ethical recommendations.
To that end, a panel made up of experts chosen by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine released a series of guidelines that essentially gives gene editing a “yellow light.” These guidelines supports gene editing on the premise that it follows a set of stringent rules and is conducted with proper oversight and precaution.
Obviously, genetic enhancement would not be supported under these guidelines, which leaves some proponents miffed. Josiah Zaynor, whose online company The ODIN sells kits allowing people to conduct simple genetic engineering experiments at home, is among those who are adamant that gene editing should be a human right. He expressed his views on the subject in an interview with The Outline:
We are at the first time in the history of humanity where we can no longer be stuck with the genes we are dealt. As a society we have begun to see how choice is a right, but for some reason when it comes to genetics, some people think we shouldn’t have a choice. I can be smart and attractive, but everyone else should be ugly, fat, and short because those are the genes they were dealt and they should just deal with it.
However, scientific institutions continue to caution against such lax views of genetic editing’s implications. Apart from the ethical questions it raises, CRISPR also faces opposition from various religious sects and legal concerns regarding the technology. Governments seem divided on the issue, with nations like China advancing research, while countries like the U.K., Germany, and the U.S. seem more concerned about regulating it.
The immense potential of gene editing to change humanity means the technology will continue to be plagued by ethical and philosophical concerns. Given the pace of advancement, however, it’s good that we’re having this debate on what and who it should be used for right now.
Frank Abagnale is world-famous for pretending to be other people. The former teenage con-man, whose exploits 50 years ago became a Leonardo DiCaprio film called Catch Me If You Can, has built a lifelong career as a security consultant and advisor to the FBI and other law enforcement agencies. So it's perhaps ironic that four and a half years ago, his identity was stolen—along with those of 3.6 million other South Carolina taxpayers.
"When that occurred," Abagnale recounted to Ars, "I was at the FBI office in Phoenix. I got a call from [a reporter at] the local TV news station, who knew that my identity was stolen, and they wanted a comment. And I said, 'Before I make a comment, what did the State Tax Revenue Office say?' Well, they said they did nothing wrong. I said that would be absolutely literally impossible. All breaches happen because people make them happen, not because hackers do it. Every breach occurs because someone in that company did something they weren't supposed to do, or somebody in that company failed to do something they were supposed to do." As it turned out (as a Secret Service investigation determined), a government employee had taken home a laptop that shouldn't have left the office and connected it—unprotected—to the Internet.
Government breaches of personal information have become all too common, as demonstrated by the impact of the hacking of the Office of Management and Budget's personnel records two years ago. But another sort of organization is now in the crosshairs of criminals seeking identity data to sell to fraudsters: doctors' offices. Abagnale was in Orlando this week to speak to health IT professionals at the 2017 HIMSS Conference about the rising threat of identity theft through hacking medical records—a threat made possible largely because of the sometimes haphazard adoption of electronic medical records systems by health care providers.