This is a list of software and programming tools for the Ada programming language, including IDEs, compilers, libraries, verification and debugging tools, numerical and scientific computing libraries, and related projects. == Compilers == GNAT — GCC Ada compiler and toolchain, maintained by AdaCore AdaCore GNAT Pro — commercial Ada compiler with advanced tooling for high-integrity and real-time systems Green Hills compiler for Ada — Ada compiler for embedded and safety-critical systems ObjectAda — Ada development environment for safety-critical and embedded systems == Integrated development environments (IDEs) and editors == GNAT Studio — IDE developed by AdaCore Emacs — supports Ada editing with Ada mode and syntax checking Eclipse — supports Ada through GNATbench plugin Visual Studio Code — Ada support via Ada Language Server extensions == Libraries and frameworks == See also: Ada Libraries on Wikibooks Ada.Calendar — date and time library Ada Web Services (AWS) — support for RESTful and SOAP web services Ada.Text_IO — standard library for text input/output Florist (POSIX Ada binding) – open-source implementation of the POSIX Ada bindings GNAT – Ada compiler part of GCC, which also provides an extensive runtime and library package hierarchy. GtkAda – Ada bindings for the GTK+ graphical user interface toolkit Matreshka – multipurpose Ada framework supporting Unicode, XML, JSON, and more. XML/Ada – XML and Unicode processing library == Real-time and embedded systems == Ada tasking — built-in concurrency support with tasks, protected objects, and rendezvous. Ada.Real_Time — real-time clocks, delays, and scheduling. ARINC 653 Ada profiles — for avionics real-time applications OpenMP Ada bindings — parallel programming for multi-core embedded systems Ravenscar profile — subset of Ada tasking for real-time and deterministic execution == Numerical and scientific computing == Ada.Numerics — libraries for numerical methods, linear algebra, and mathematical functions. SPARK math libraries — formal-methods-compliant numerical routines == Verification, debugging, and analysis == GNATprove — formal verification and static analysis tool for Ada and SPARK GNATstack — runtime stack analysis and checking GNATcoverage — code coverage measurement for Ada projects AdaControl — style checking and metrics for Ada == Testing frameworks == AUnit — unit testing framework for Ada GNATtest — automated testing framework for Ada == Documentation and code generation == GNATdoc — generates HTML documentation from Ada source code
Data verification is a process in which different types of data are checked for accuracy and inconsistencies after data migration is done. In some domains it is referred to Source Data Verification (SDV), such as in clinical trials. Data verification helps to determine whether data was accurately translated when data is transferred from one source to another, is complete, and supports processes in the new system. During verification, there may be a need for a parallel run of both systems to identify areas of disparity and forestall erroneous data loss. Methods for data verification include double data entry, proofreading and automated verification of data. Proofreading data involves someone checking the data entered against the original document. This is also time-consuming and costly. Automated verification of data can be achieved using one way hashes locally or through use of a SaaS based service such as Q by SoLVBL to provide immutable seals to allow verification of the original data.
In databases, change data capture (CDC) is a set of software design patterns used to determine and track the data that has changed (the "deltas") so that action can be taken using the changed data. The result is a delta-driven dataset. CDC is an approach to data integration that is based on the identification, capture and delivery of the changes made to enterprise data sources. For instance it can be used for incremental update of data loading. CDC occurs often in data warehouse environments since capturing and preserving the state of data across time is one of the core functions of a data warehouse, but CDC can be utilized in any database or data repository system. == Methodology == System developers can set up CDC mechanisms in a number of ways and in any one or a combination of system layers from application logic down to physical storage. In a simplified CDC context, one computer system has data believed to have changed from a previous point in time, and a second computer system needs to take action based on that changed data. The former is the source, the latter is the target. It is possible that the source and target are the same system physically, but that would not change the design pattern logically. Multiple CDC solutions can exist in a single system. === Timestamps on rows === Tables whose changes must be captured may have a column that represents the time of last change. Names such as LAST_UPDATE, LAST_MODIFIED, etc. are common. Any row in any table that has a timestamp in that column that is more recent than the last time data was captured is considered to have changed. Timestamps on rows are also frequently used for optimistic locking so this column is often available. === Version numbers on rows === Database designers give tables whose changes must be captured a column that contains a version number. Names such as VERSION_NUMBER, etc. are common. One technique is to mark each changed row with a version number. A current version is maintained for the table, or possibly a group of tables. This is stored in a supporting construct such as a reference table. When a change capture occurs, all data with the latest version number is considered to have changed. Once the change capture is complete, the reference table is updated with a new version number. (Do not confuse this technique with row-level versioning used for optimistic locking. For optimistic locking each row has an independent version number, typically a sequential counter. This allows a process to atomically update a row and increment its counter only if another process has not incremented the counter. But CDC cannot use row-level versions to find all changes unless it knows the original "starting" version of every row. This is impractical to maintain.) === Status indicators on rows === This technique can either supplement or complement timestamps and versioning. It can configure an alternative if, for example, a status column is set up on a table row indicating that the row has changed (e.g., a boolean column that, when set to true, indicates that the row has changed). Otherwise, it can act as a complement to the previous methods, indicating that a row, despite having a new version number or a later date, still shouldn't be updated on the target (for example, the data may require human validation). === Time/version/status on rows === This approach combines the three previously discussed methods. As noted, it is not uncommon to see multiple CDC solutions at work in a single system, however, the combination of time, version, and status provides a particularly powerful mechanism and programmers should utilize them as a trio where possible. The three elements are not redundant or superfluous. Using them together allows for such logic as, "Capture all data for version 2.1 that changed between 2005-06-01 00:00 and 2005-07-01 00:00 where the status code indicates it is ready for production." === Triggers on tables === May include a publish/subscribe pattern to communicate the changed data to multiple targets. In this approach, triggers log events that happen to the transactional table into another queue table that can later be "played back". For example, imagine an Accounts table, when transactions are taken against this table, triggers would fire that would then store a history of the event or even the deltas into a separate queue table. The queue table might have schema with the following fields: Id, TableName, RowId, Timestamp, Operation. The data inserted for our Account sample might be: 1, Accounts, 76, 2008-11-02 00:15, Update. More complicated designs might log the actual data that changed. This queue table could then be "played back" to replicate the data from the source system to a target. Data capture offers a challenge in that the structure, contents and use of a transaction log is specific to a database management system. Unlike data access, no standard exists for transaction logs. Most database management systems do not document the internal format of their transaction logs, although some provide programmatic interfaces to their transaction logs (for example: Oracle, DB2, SQL/MP, SQL/MX and SQL Server 2008). Other challenges in using transaction logs for change data capture include: Coordinating the reading of the transaction logs and the archiving of log files (database management software typically archives log files off-line on a regular basis). Translation between physical storage formats that are recorded in the transaction logs and the logical formats typically expected by database users (e.g., some transaction logs save only minimal buffer differences that are not directly useful for change consumers). Dealing with changes to the format of the transaction logs between versions of the database management system. Eliminating uncommitted changes that the database wrote to the transaction log and later rolled back. Dealing with changes to the metadata of tables in the database. CDC solutions based on transaction log files have distinct advantages that include: minimal impact on the database (even more so if one uses log shipping to process the logs on a dedicated host). no need for programmatic changes to the applications that use the database. low latency in acquiring changes. transactional integrity: log scanning can produce a change stream that replays the original transactions in the order they were committed. Such a change stream include changes made to all tables participating in the captured transaction. no need to change the database schema == Confounding factors == As often occurs in complex domains, the final solution to a CDC problem may have to balance many competing concerns. === Unsuitable source systems === Change data capture both increases in complexity and reduces in value if the source system saves metadata changes when the data itself is not modified. For example, some Data models track the user who last looked at but did not change the data in the same structure as the data. This results in noise in the Change Data Capture. === Tracking the capture === Actually tracking the changes depends on the data source. If the data is being persisted in a modern database then Change Data Capture is a simple matter of permissions. Two techniques are in common use: Tracking changes using database triggers Reading the transaction log as, or shortly after, it is written. If the data is not in a modern database, CDC becomes a programming challenge. === Push versus pull === Push: the source process creates a snapshot of changes within its own process and delivers rows downstream. The downstream process uses the snapshot, creates its own subset and delivers them to the next process. Pull: the target that is immediately downstream from the source, prepares a request for data from the source. The downstream target delivers the snapshot to the next target, as in the push model. === Alternatives === Sometimes the slowly changing dimension is used as an alternative method. CDC and SCD are similar in that both methods can detect changes in a data set. The most common forms of SCD are type 1 (overwrite), type 2 (maintain history) or 3 (only previous and current value). SCD 2 can be useful if history is needed in the target system. CDC overwrites in the target system (akin to SCD1), and is ideal when only the changed data needs to arrive at the target, i.e. a delta-driven dataset.
Instant messaging (IM) technology is a type of synchronous computer-mediated communication involving the immediate (real-time) transmission of messages between two or more parties over the Internet or another computer network. Originally involving simple text message exchanges, modern instant messaging applications and services (also variously known as instant messenger, messaging app, chat app, chat client, or simply a messenger) tend to also feature the exchange of multimedia, emojis, file transfer, VoIP (voice calling), and video chat capabilities. Instant messaging systems facilitate connections between specified known users (often using a contact list also known as a "buddy list" or "friend list") or in chat rooms, and can be standalone apps or integrated into a wider social media platform, or in a website where it can, for instance, be used for conversational commerce. Originally the term "instant messaging" was distinguished from "text messaging" by being run on a computer network instead of a cellular/mobile network, being able to write longer messages, real-time communication, presence ("status"), and being free (only cost of access instead of per SMS message sent). Instant messaging was pioneered in the early Internet era; the IRC protocol was the earliest to achieve wide adoption. Later in the 1990s, ICQ was among the first closed and commercialized instant messengers, and several rival services appeared afterwards as it became a popular use of the Internet. Beginning with its first introduction in 2005, BlackBerry Messenger became the first popular example of mobile-based IM, combining features of traditional IM and mobile SMS. Instant messaging remains very popular today; IM apps are the most widely used smartphone apps: in 2018 for instance there were 980 million monthly active users of WeChat and 1.3 billion monthly users of WhatsApp, the largest IM network. == Overview == Instant messaging (IM), sometimes also called "messaging" or "texting", consists of computer-based human communication between two users (private messaging) or more (chat room or "group") in real-time, allowing immediate receipt of acknowledgment or reply. This is in direct contrast to email, where conversations are not in real-time, and the perceived quasi-synchrony of the communications by the users (although many systems allow users to send offline messages that the other user receives when logging in). Earlier IM networks were limited to text-based communication, not dissimilar to mobile text messaging. As technology has moved forward, IM has expanded to include voice calling using a microphone, videotelephony using webcams, file transfer, location sharing, image and video transfer, voice notes, and other features. IM is conducted over the Internet or other types of networks (see also LAN messenger). Depending on the IM protocol, the technical architecture can be peer-to-peer (direct point-to-point transmission) or client–server (when all clients have to first connect to the central server). Primary IM services are controlled by their corresponding companies and usually follow the client-server model. At one point, the term "Instant Messenger" was a service mark of AOL Time Warner and could not be used in software not affiliated with AOL in the United States. For this reason, in April 2007, the instant messaging client formerly named Gaim (or gaim) announced that they would be renamed "Pidgin". === Clients === Modern IM services generally provide their own client, either a separately installed application or a browser-based client. They are normally centralised networks run by the servers of the platform's operators, unlike peer-to-peer protocols like XMPP. These usually only work within the same IM network, although some allow limited function with other services (see #Interoperability). Third-party client software applications exist that will connect with most of the major IM services. There is the class of instant messengers that uses the serverless model, which doesn't require servers, and the IM network consists only of clients. There are several serverless messengers: RetroShare, Tox, Bitmessage, Ricochet. See also: LAN messenger. Some examples of popular IM services today include Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp Messenger, WeChat, QQ Messenger, Viber, Line, and Snapchat. The popularity of certain apps greatly differ between different countries. Certain apps have an emphasis on certain uses - for example, Skype focuses on video calling, Slack focuses on messaging and file sharing for work teams, and Snapchat focuses on image messages. Some social networking services offer messaging services as a component of their overall platform, such as Facebook's Facebook Messenger, who also own WhatsApp. Others have a direct IM function as an additional adjunct component of their social networking platforms, like Instagram, Reddit, Tumblr, TikTok, Clubhouse and Twitter; this also includes for example dating websites, such as OkCupid or Plenty of Fish, and online gaming chat platforms. === Features === ==== Private and group messaging ==== Private chat allows users to converse privately with another person or a group. Privacy can also be enhanced in several ways, such as end-to-end encryption by default. Public and group chat features allow users to communicate with multiple people simultaneously. ==== Calling ==== Many major IM services and applications offer a call feature for user-to-user voice calls, conference calls, and voice messages. The call functionality is useful for professionals who utilize the application for work purposes and as a hands-free method. Videotelephony using a webcam is also possible by some. ==== Games and entertainment ==== Some IM applications include in-app games for entertainment. Yahoo! Messenger, for example, introduced these where users could play a game and viewed by friends in real-time. MSN Messenger featured a number of playable games within the interface. Facebook's Messenger has had a built-in option to play games with people in a chat, including games like Tetris and Blackjack. Discord features multiple games built inside the "activities" tab in voice channels. ==== Payments ==== A relatively new feature to instant messaging, peer-to-peer payments are available for financial tasks on top of communication. The lack of a service fee also makes these advantageous to financial applications. IM services such as Facebook Messenger and the WeChat 'super-app' for example offer a payment feature. == History == === Early systems === Though the term dates from the 1990s, instant messaging predates the Internet, first appearing on multi-user operating systems like Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS) and Multiplexed Information and Computing Service (Multics) in the mid-1960s. Initially, some of these systems were used as notification systems for services like printing, but quickly were used to facilitate communication with other users logged into the same machine. CTSS facilitated communication via text message for up to 30 people. Parallel to instant messaging were early online chat facilities, the earliest of which was Talkomatic (1973) on the PLATO system, which allowed 5 people to chat simultaneously on a 512 x 512 plasma display (5 lines of text + 1 status line per person). During the bulletin board system (BBS) phenomenon that peaked during the 1980s, some systems incorporated chat features which were similar to instant messaging; Freelancin' Roundtable was one prime example. The first such general-availability commercial online chat service (as opposed to PLATO, which was educational) was the CompuServe CB Simulator in 1980, created by CompuServe executive Alexander "Sandy" Trevor in Columbus, Ohio. As networks developed, the protocols spread with the networks. Some of these used a peer-to-peer protocol (e.g. talk, ntalk and ytalk), while others required peers to connect to a server (see talker and IRC). The Zephyr Notification Service (still in use at some institutions) was invented at MIT's Project Athena in the 1980s to allow service providers to locate and send messages to users. Early instant messaging programs were primarily real-time text, where characters appeared as they were typed. This includes the Unix "talk" command line program, which was popular in the 1980s and early 1990s. Some BBS chat programs (i.e. Celerity BBS) also used a similar interface. Modern implementations of real-time text also exist in instant messengers, such as AOL's Real-Time IM as an optional feature. In the latter half of the 1980s and into the early 1990s, the Quantum Link online service for Commodore 64 computers offered user-to-user messages between concurrently connected customers, which they called "On-Line Messages" (or OLM for short), and later "FlashMail." Quantum Link later became America Online and made AOL Instant Messenger (AIM, discussed later). While the Quantum Link client software ran on a Commodore 64, using only
Tapingo was an American mobile commerce application that offers advance ordering for pickup and food delivery services for college campuses. The company was acquired by Grubhub in September 2018 for approximately $150 million. Following the acquisition, Tapingo’s campus-ordering functionality was integrated into the Grubhub app (Grubhub Campus Dining) and the Tapingo service was discontinued during 2019. Tapingo is differentiated from other on-demand delivery/logistics companies, such as Waiter.com, Postmates, or DoorDash, by focusing its efforts on serving the college market. Through Tapingo, users can browse menus, place orders, pay for the meal and schedule the pickup or have it delivered. On certain campuses, students are able to use their university's meal dollars to pay for food. In the spring of 2012, Tapingo first launched its services on five campuses (Santa Clara University, Loyola Marymount University, Biola University, the University of Maine, and California Lutheran University), and has since expanded to more than 200 college campuses across the U.S. and Canada, serving 100 markets. To date, Tapingo has received venture funding from Carmel Ventures, Khosla Ventures, Kinzon Capital, DCM Ventures and Qualcomm Ventures. In fall 2015, Tapingo announced expansion plans through major partnership deals with national brands like Chipotle Mexican Grill and 7-Eleven, regional restaurants such as Taco Bueno, and global foodservice provider Aramark.
S.B. 152 and H.B. 311, collectively known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act, were social media regulation bills that were passed by the Utah State Legislature in March 2023. The bills would have collectively imposed restrictions on how social networking services serve minors in the state of Utah, including mandatory age verification and age restrictions, as well as restrictions on data collection and on algorithmic recommendations. The Act was intended to take effect in March 2024. However, following a lawsuit over the Act by NetChoice, a tech industry lobby group, the Utah attorney general stated in January 2024 that its implementation had been delayed to October 2024, but was likely to be repealed and amended. On September 10, 2024 Chief Judge Robert J. Shelby issued a written order granting a request from NetChoice for a preliminary injunction, meaning that Utah will be unable to enforce its social media law as litigation plays out. The law was appealed to the 10th Circuit on October 11, 2024 and is awaiting a decision. == Provisions == The Act comprises two bills, S.B. 152 and H.B. 311, which respectively regulate access to social network accounts registered to minors, and impose obligations on social networking services to follow design practices that protect the privacy of minors. The bills would apply to social networks with more than 5 million active users in the United States. Social networking services would've verified the age of all users in the state of Utah, or else their account must've been deleted. The Act does not specify a specific method of age verification. Users who are under 18 must have consent from a parent or guardian to open an account, and the parent must be able to have access to the account and its data for monitoring. Unless required to comply with state or federal law, social networks were prohibited from collecting data based on the activity of minors, and may've not displayed targeted advertising or algorithmic recommendations of content, users, or groups to minors. A social network must not allow minors to access the service between the hours of 10:30 p.m., and 6:30 a.m. without parental consent. H.B. 311 prohibits social networks from exposing features to minors that cause them to have an "addiction" to the platform; the service must perform quarterly audits, and may be sued by users for harms caused by providing "addictive" features; there is a rebuttable presumption of harm if the plaintiff is 16 or younger. The bills prescribed fines of $2,500 per-violation for violations of the provisions of S.B. 152, and up to $250,000 in liabilities (plus fines of $2,500 per-user) for violations of the addiction rules. == History == The two bills were passed in early-March 2023, and signed by Governor Spencer Cox on March 23, 2023. Cox cited studies linking social media addiction to increases in depression and suicide among youth. They were originally intended to take effect on March 1, 2024. In the wake of a lawsuit in Arkansas by the trade association NetChoice over a similar bill, state senator and bill author Mike McKell stated that he planned to introduce amendments when the legislature resumed in 2024. In December 2023, NetChoice filed a lawsuit in Utah seeking to block the Act, citing that its definition of a social network was too vague, and that it "restricts who can express themselves, what can be said, and when and how speech on covered websites can occur, down to the very hours of the day minors can use covered websites. The First Amendment, reinforced by decades of precedent, allows none of this." In regards to its age verification requirements, NetChoice argued that "it may not be enough to simply verify the age of whatever person may be listed on a form of identification (even if they have such a record) because that record may not accurately reflect who the individual actually is." The office of the attorney general stated that the state was "reviewing the lawsuit but remains intently focused on the goal of this legislation: Protecting young people from negative and harmful effects of social media use." In January 2024, Attorney General Sean Reyes asked the court to delay a hearing over the bill, stating that its effective date had been delayed to October 2024, and that the legislature planned to repeal and replace the bills. On September 10, 2024, Federal Chief Judge Robert Shelby granted a preliminary injunction to stop enforcement of the law as litigation continues. The law was later appealed on October 11, 2024, by the state of Utah and had a court hearing on the appeal on November 20, 2025.
Data profiling is the process of examining the data available from an existing information source (e.g. a database or a file) and collecting statistics or informative summaries about that data. The purpose of these statistics may be to: Find out whether existing data can be easily used for other purposes Improve the ability to search data by tagging it with keywords, descriptions, or assigning it to a category Assess data quality, including whether the data conforms to particular standards or patterns Assess the risk involved in integrating data in new applications, including the challenges of joins Discover metadata of the source database, including value patterns and distributions, key candidates, foreign-key candidates, and functional dependencies Assess whether known metadata accurately describes the actual values in the source database Understanding data challenges early in any data intensive project, so that late project surprises are avoided. Finding data problems late in the project can lead to delays and cost overruns. Have an enterprise view of all data, for uses such as master data management, where key data is needed, or data governance for improving data quality. == Introduction == Data profiling refers to the analysis of information for use in a data warehouse in order to clarify the structure, content, relationships, and derivation rules of the data. Profiling helps to not only understand anomalies and assess data quality, but also to discover, register, and assess enterprise metadata. The result of the analysis is used to determine the suitability of the candidate source systems, usually giving the basis for an early go/no-go decision, and also to identify problems for later solution design. == How data profiling is conducted == Data profiling utilizes methods of descriptive statistics such as minimum, maximum, mean, mode, percentile, standard deviation, frequency, variation, aggregates such as count and sum, and additional metadata information obtained during data profiling such as data type, length, discrete values, uniqueness, occurrence of null values, typical string patterns, and abstract type recognition. The metadata can then be used to discover problems such as illegal values, misspellings, missing values, varying value representation, and duplicates. Different analyses are performed for different structural levels. E.g. single columns could be profiled individually to get an understanding of frequency distribution of different values, type, and use of each column. Embedded value dependencies can be exposed in a cross-columns analysis. Finally, overlapping value sets possibly representing foreign key relationships between entities can be explored in an inter-table analysis. Normally, purpose-built tools are used for data profiling to ease the process. The computational complexity increases when going from single column, to single table, to cross-table structural profiling. Therefore, performance is an evaluation criterion for profiling tools. == When is data profiling conducted? == According to Kimball, data profiling is performed several times and with varying intensity throughout the data warehouse developing process. A light profiling assessment should be undertaken immediately after candidate source systems have been identified and DW/BI business requirements have been satisfied. The purpose of this initial analysis is to clarify at an early stage if the correct data is available at the appropriate detail level and that anomalies can be handled subsequently. If this is not the case the project may be terminated. Additionally, more in-depth profiling is done prior to the dimensional modeling process in order assess what is required to convert data into a dimensional model. Detailed profiling extends into the ETL system design process in order to determine the appropriate data to extract and which filters to apply to the data set. Additionally, data profiling may be conducted in the data warehouse development process after data has been loaded into staging, the data marts, etc. Conducting data at these stages helps ensure that data cleaning and transformations have been done correctly and in compliance of requirements. == Benefits and examples == Data profiling can improve data quality, shorten the implementation cycle of major projects, and improve users' understanding of data. Discovering business knowledge embedded in data itself is one of the significant benefits derived from data profiling. It can improve data accuracy in corporate databases.
Information Networking Institute (INI) is an academic department within the College of Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. The institute was established in 1989 as the nation's first research and education center devoted to information networking. The INI also partners with research and outreach entities to extend educational and training programs to a broad audience of people using information networking as part of their daily lives. The INI is the educational partner of Carnegie Mellon CyLab, a university-wide, multidisciplinary research center involving more than 50 faculty and 100 graduate students. == Center of Academic Excellence Designations == Through the work of the INI and CyLab, Carnegie Mellon University has been designated by the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security as a National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance/Cyber Defense Education (CAE-IA/CD) and a National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance/Cyber Defense Research (CAE-R). It has also been designated by the NSA and the U.S. Cyber Command as a National Center of Academic Excellence in Cyber Operations (CAE-Cyber Ops). Through these designations, the INI and CyLab participate in the: Federal CyberCorps Scholarship for Service (SFS) Program - Students pursuing graduate degrees in information security (MSIS or MSISPM) are eligible for scholarships under the SFS program. Information Assurance Scholarship Program (IASP) - Students pursuing graduate degrees in information security and seeking careers with the Department of Defense may be eligible for scholarships under the IASP. Capacity Building Program for Faculty from Historically Black and Hispanic Serving Institutions - The INI and CyLab developed a month-long, in-residence summer program to help build information assurance education and research capacity at colleges and universities designated as Minority Serving Institutions – specifically, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). This program is supported through a grant from the National Science Foundation. == Faculty and researchers == Faculty involved in teaching and advising in the INI programs are conducting research in all aspects of information networking and information security. Affiliated research centers are: Carnegie Mellon CyLab SEI's CERT Division == Alumni == The INI has graduated over 1,400 alumni who currently occupy positions in a variety of sectors across industry, government and academia.
Hamilton C shell is a clone of the Unix C shell and utilities for Microsoft Windows created by Nicole Hamilton at Hamilton Laboratories as a completely original work, not based on any prior code. It was first released on OS/2 on December 12, 1988 and on Windows NT in July 1992. The OS/2 version was discontinued in 2003 but the Windows version continues to be actively supported. == Design == Hamilton C shell differs from the Unix C shell in several respects. These include its compiler architecture, its use of threads, and the decision to follow Windows rather than Unix conventions. === Parser === The original C shell uses an ad hoc parser. This has led to complaints about its limitations. It works well enough for the kinds of things users type interactively but not very well for the more complex commands a user might take time to write in a script. It is not possible, for example, to pipe the output of a foreach statement into grep. There was a limit to how complex a command it could handle. By contrast, Hamilton uses a top-down recursive descent parser that allows it to compile statements to an internal form before running them. As a result, statements can be nested or piped arbitrarily. The language has also been extended with built-in and user-defined procedures, local variables, floating point and additional expression, editing and wildcarding operators, including an "indefinite directory" wildcard construct written as "..." that matches zero or more directory levels as required to make the rest of the pattern match. === Threads === Lacking fork or a high performance way to recreate that functionality, Hamilton uses the Windows threads facilities instead. When a new thread is created, it runs within the same process space and it shares all of the process state. If one thread changes the current directory or the contents of memory, it's changed for all the threads. It's much cheaper to create a thread than a process but there's no isolation between them. To recreate the missing isolation of separate processes, the threads cooperate to share resources using locks. === Windows conventions === Hamilton differs from other Unix shells in that it also directly supports Windows conventions for drive letters, filename slashes, escape characters, etc.
Point-to-point encryption (P2PE) is a standard established by the PCI Security Standards Council. Payment solutions that offer similar encryption but do not meet the P2PE standard are referred to as end-to-end encryption (E2EE) solutions. The objective of P2PE and E2EE is to provide a payment security solution that instantaneously converts confidential payment card (credit and debit card) data and information into indecipherable code at the time the card is swiped, in order to prevent hacking and fraud. It is designed to maximize the security of payment card transactions in an increasingly complex regulatory environment. == The standard == The P2PE Standard defines the requirements that a "solution" must meet in order to be accepted as a PCI-validated P2PE solution. A "solution" is a complete set of hardware, software, gateway, decryption, device handling, etc. Only "solutions" can be validated; individual pieces of hardware such as card readers cannot be validated. It is also a common mistake to refer to P2PE validated solutions as "certified"; there is no such certification. The determination of whether or not a solution meets the P2PE standard is the responsibility of a P2PE Qualified Security Assessor (P2PE-QSA). P2PE-QSA companies are independent third-party companies who employ assessors that have met the PCI Security Standards Council's requirements for education and experience, and have passed the requisite exam. The PCI Security Standards Council does not validate solutions. == How it works == As a payment card is swiped through a card reading device, referred to as a point of interaction (POI) device, at the merchant location or point of sale, the device immediately encrypts the card information. A device that is part of a PCI-validated P2PE solution uses an algorithmic calculation to encrypt the confidential payment card data. From the POI, the encrypted, indecipherable codes are sent to the payment gateway or processor for decryption. The keys for encryption and decryption are never available to the merchant, making card data entirely invisible to the retailer. Once the encrypted codes are within the secure data zone of the payment processor, the codes are decrypted to the original card numbers and then passed to the issuing bank for authorization. The bank either approves or rejects the transaction, depending upon the card holder's payment account status. The merchant is then notified if the payment is accepted or rejected to complete the process along with a token that the merchant can store. This token is a unique number reference to the original transaction that the merchant can use should they ever be needed to perform research or refund the customer without ever knowing the customer's card information (tokenization). There are also Qualified Integrator and Reseller (QIR) Companies, which are businesses authorized to "implement, configure, and/or support validated" PA-DSS Payment Applications, and perform qualified installations. == Solution providers == According to the PCI Security Standards Council:The P2PE solution provider is a third-party entity (for example, a processor, acquirer, or payment gateway) that has overall responsibility for the design and implementation of a specific P2PE solution, and manages P2PE solutions for its merchant customers. The solution provider has overall responsibility for ensuring that all P2PE requirements are met, including any P2PE requirements performed by third-party organizations on behalf of the solution provider (for example, certification authorities and key-injection facilities). == Benefits == === Customer benefits === P2PE significantly reduces the risk of payment card fraud by instantaneously encrypting confidential cardholder data at the moment a payment card is swiped or "dipped" if it is a chip card at the card reading device (payment terminal) or POI. === Merchant benefits === P2PE significantly facilitates merchant responsibilities: With a P2PE validated solution, merchants save significant time and money as PCI requirements may be greatly reduced. Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS). For organizations who use a P2PE validated solution provider, the PCI Self Assessment Questionnaire is reduced from 12 sections to 4 sections and the controls are reduced from 329 questions to just 35. In the event of fraud, the P2PE Solution Provider, not the merchant, is held accountable for data loss and resulting fines that may be assessed by the card brands (American Express, Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and JCB). The PCI Security Standards Council does not assess penalties on Solution Providers or Merchants. The payment process with P2PE is quicker than other transaction processes, thus creating simpler and faster customer–merchant transactions. == Point-to-point encryption versus end-to-end encryption == === Point-to-point === A point-to-point connection directly links system 1 (the point of payment card acceptance) to system 2 (the point of payment processing). A true P2PE solution is determined with three main factors: The solution uses a hardware-to-hardware encryption and decryption process along with a POI device that has SRED (Secure Reading and Exchange of Data) listed as a function. The solution has been validated to the PCI P2PE Standard which includes specific POI device requirements such as strict controls regarding shipping, receiving, tamper-evident packaging, and installation. A solution includes merchant education in the form of a P2PE Instruction Manual, which guides the merchant on POI device use, storage, return for repairs, and regular PCI reporting. === End-to-end === End-to-end encryption as the name suggests has the advantage over P2PE that card details are not unencrypted between the two endpoints. If the endpoints are a PCI PED validated PIN pad and a POS acquirer, there is no opportunity for the card details to be intercepted. It is obviously important that the endpoints (the PED and gateway) are provided by PCI accredited organisations. == PCI point-to-point encryption requirements == The requirements include: Secure encryption of payment card data at the point of interaction (POI), P2PE validated application(s) at the point of interaction, Secure management of encryption and decryption devices, Management of the decryption environment and all decrypted account data, Use of secure encryption methodologies and cryptographic key operations, including key generation, distribution, loading/injection, administration, and usage.
Payment tokenization is a data security process that replaces sensitive payment information, such as credit card numbers, with a unique identifier or "token." This token can be used in place of actual data during transactions but has no exploitable value if breached, thereby reducing the risk of data theft and fraud. == Overview == Payment tokenization is generally categorized into two types: security tokens and payment tokens. Security tokens, also known as post-authorization tokens, are used to replace sensitive information like Primary Account Numbers (PANs), such as credit card numbers either after a payment is authorized or for storing data securely (data-at-rest), such as in merchant databases. These models have been in use since the mid-2000s, following the introduction of the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard in 2004, which established standards for safeguarding cardholder data. The Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council's 2011 Tokenization Guidelines and the proposed American National Standards Institute X9 standards emphasize using tokens primarily to secure sensitive information, not as replacements for payment credentials processed over financial networks. Traditionally, merchants stored PANs to support backend operations such as settlements, reconciliations, chargebacks, loyalty programs, and customer service. However, with the adoption of security tokenization, merchants can substitute PANs with tokens in their systems. This not only reduces their exposure to fraud but also helps minimize the scope and cost of PCI-DSS compliance, offering a more secure and efficient way to manage cardholder data. == Applications == Payment tokenization is widely used by mobile wallets such as Apple Pay, Google Pay, and Samsung Pay use tokenization to safely store card data on devices. E-commerce platforms rely on it to securely retain customer payment details for recurring purchases. At the physical point of sale, EMV-enabled systems use tokenization to protect card information during in-store transactions. Also, subscription billing services implement tokenization to manage and safeguard payment credentials for ongoing charges.
Peñabot is the nickname for automated social media accounts allegedly used by the Mexican government of Enrique Peña Nieto and the PRI political party to keep unfavorable news from reaching the Mexican public. Peñabot accusations are related to the broader issue of fake news in the 21st century. == History of disinformation in Mexican politics == The PRI political party has been reported to use fake news since before Peña Nieto. The main tactic originally was to spread such propaganda through open radio and television networks. Such tactic was effective in Mexico, because newspaper readership is low and cable TV is largely limited to the middle classes; consequently, the country's two major television networks – Televisa and TV Azteca – exert a significant influence in national politics. Televisa itself, not only owns around two-thirds of the programming on Mexico's TV channels, making it not only Mexico's largest television network, but also is the largest media network in the Spanish-speaking world. == Peñabots == Analysts have given the name Peñabots to a suspected network of automated accounts on social media used by the Mexican government to spread pro-government propaganda and to marginalize dissenting opinions in social media. The bots were first noticed in the 2012 elections when they were used to disseminate opinions in support of Enrique Peña Nieto on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. According to Aristegui Noticias, their usage went against articles 6 and 134 of the Mexican Constitution. Those used by Peña Nieto's government cost an estimated 80 million pesos monthly, which news outlets argued only helped the government spread fake support towards the president, but did not have a benefit towards Mexican people (with whom EPN was highly unpopular). Facebook held approximately 640,321 Peñabots, while Twitter had less. As of July 2017, Oxford Internet Institute's Computational Propaganda Research Project claimed many western democracies, Mexico included, perform social media manipulation, thus saying the manipulation comes directly from the Mexican government itself. During Peña Nieto's subsequent presidency, analysts noted that Peñabots were used to overpower trending topics that critiqued government, to flood trending government critical hashtags with spam, to create fake trends by pushing alternative hashtags, and to push smear campaigns and threats against government-critical activists and journalists. Peñabots were distinguished as their pattern of activity was distinct from that of ordinary interaction on social networks. === Meadebots === On Twitter it was reported that about 94% of the followers of 2018 presidential candidate from the PRI Jose Antonio Meade were bots. When Antonio Meade presented himself as a candidate for the 2018 presidential election, his social media accounts such as "@MovimientoMEADE" (created by the PRI's official account @PRI_Nacional), obtained a huge quantity of followers in a short span of time. Some users noticed and brought it to attention, and after investigation it was reported 94% of such followers were bots (702,000 out of 747,000), and the account was eliminated from Twitter after 20 hours. The fake accounts used the hashtags #YoConMeade and #Meade18. It was further revealed was that Meade's official account on Twitter, @JoseAMeadeK had 25% bots (216,000 fake followers out of the 981,000). == Manipulation of news media in Mexico, through television == The Mexican government of Peña Nieto has been accused of using various means to keep unfavorable news from reaching the Mexican people. Many Mexicans have protested this practice as it clearly goes against the freedom of speech. The PRI has been reported to use fake news since before Peña Nieto. The main tactic has been to spread such propaganda through radio and television. This tactic is perceived as effective in Mexico, because newspaper readership is low and research on the Internet and cable TV is largely limited to the middle classes; consequently, the country's two major television networks – Televisa and TV Azteca – exert a significant influence in national politics. Televisa itself, owns around two-thirds of the programming on Mexico's TV channels, making it not only Mexico's largest television network, but also is the largest media network in the Spanish-speaking world. In June 2012, before the 2012 Mexican presidential elections, the British newspaper The Guardian published a series of allegations claiming Televisa, sold favorable coverage to top politicians in its news and entertainment shows, this scandal became known as the Televisa controversy. The documents published by 'The Guardian alleged that a secretive circle within Televisa manipulated news coverage to favor PRI presidential candidate Enrique Peña Nieto, who was poised as favorite to win. Televisa's secret circle supposedly commissioned videos to promote Peña Nieto and lash out his political rivals in 2009. The Guardian documents suggest that Televisa's secret team distributed such videos through e-mail, posting them posted them on Facebook and YouTube, some can still be seen there. Another document was a PowerPoint presentation, with a slide explicitly aimed at rival leftist candidate of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Supposedly given to The Guardian by a Televisa employee. The document's authenticity was never possible to confirm– however dates, names, and events largely coincide. Televisa refused to talk the documents, and denied a relationship with the PRI or its presidential candidate, saying that they had provided equal media coverage to all parties. Televisa published an article supposedly showing discrepancies in The Guardian documents and denying accusations. Mexican citizens complained about the perceived favoritism towards Enrique Peña Nieto and the PRI, protesting through the Yo Soy 132 movement which Televisa covered in detail. However, Televisa's news media coverage is perceived to have been biased, by using a media coverage tactic Mexican citizens call cortinas de humo (smoke screens). These introduce a news scandal giving extensive coverage to distract citizens from a potential conflict-of-interest or controversy that could damage the image of the politician favored by the network. An example of a perceived smoke screen would be the news media coverage of "Caso Michoacán" and "Caso Paolette" distracting all the attention from the parallel "Yo soy 132" movement. A few years later, on the day of September 11, 2016; factual evidence of Televisa's performing media manipulation emerged, when a Televisa news anchor while live-on air reading a teleprompter, mistakenly read out loud that "try that Jaime "Ël Bronco" Rodríguez Calderón (Nuevo Leon's governor) is mentioned as little as possible". Newspaper El Universal caught it on video and published it social media. Televisa didn't mention the story and declined to comment. Lack of news coverage concerning Nuevo León's Governor Jaime Rodriguez, is perceived due to him being the first elected governor to not be part of any political party (Independent Governor), and because unlike the governors from the PRI preceding him, the independent governor "El Bronco" doesn't spend money on publicity at all, preferring to communicate all news by using social media such as Twitter and Facebook. While the incident may have proven Televisa's bias, there wasn't anything to incriminate the PRI political party or Enrique Peña Nieto, though it did further suspicion of Televisa manipulating news media. In contrast, a December 2017 article of The New York Times, reported Enrique Peña Nieto spending about 2000 million dollars on publicity, during his first 5 years as president, the largest publicity budget ever spent by a Mexican President. Additionally, 68 percent of news journalists admitted to not believe to have enough freedom of speech, and award-winning news reporter Carmen Aristegui was controversially fired shortly after revealing the Mexican White House scandals. == Violence and spying towards news journalists and civil rights activists == Far for only being receiving accusations of spreading fake news, the Mexican government of EPN (Enrique Peña Nieto) has also been accused of violence towards news journalists, and of spying on them, and also towards civil right leaders and their families. During his tenure as president, Peña Nieto has been accused of failing to protect news journalists, whose deaths are speculated to be politically triggered, by politicians attempting to prevent them from covering political scandals. The New York Times published a news report on the matter titled, "In Mexico it's easy to kill a journalist", on it mentioning how during EPN's government, Mexico became one of the worst countries on which to be a journalist. The assassination of journalist Javier Valdez on May 23, 2017, received national coverage, with multiple news journalists