AI for Business

Explore the best AI for Business — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step how-to guides, curated by Aizhi.

• 

  STIT logic

  STIT logic (from seeing to it that) is a family of modal and branching-time logics for reasoning about agency and choice. A typical STIT operator has the form [ i s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {stit}}:\varphi ]} , usually read as "agent i {\displaystyle i} sees to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } ", and is interpreted in models where agents choose between alternative possible futures. STIT logics are used in action theory, deontic logic, epistemic logic, and the theory of intelligent agents to formalise notions such as "could have done otherwise", responsibility, joint action, and strategic ability in an indeterministic world. == Etymology == The acronym STIT comes from the English phrase "seeing to it that", introduced in influential work by Nuel Belnap and Michael Perloff on the logical analysis of agentive expressions. In this tradition, "to see to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } " is treated as a primitive agency operator, rather than being reduced to ordinary modal necessity. == History == Modern STIT logic arose in the 1980s in the context of branching-time semantics and formal theories of agency. Belnap and Perloff's article "Seeing to it that: A canonical form for agentives" introduced the idea of treating expressions of the form "agent i sees to it that φ" as a primitive modal operator, and analysed such sentences using a branching tree of moments and histories. This approach was further developed in a series of papers on indeterminism and agency and provided the conceptual core for later STIT formalisms. In the 1990s the basic formal systems of STIT logic were worked out. Horty and Belnap's influential paper on the deliberative STIT operator distinguished between a "Chellas" STIT that merely records the result of an agent's present choice and a "deliberative" STIT that requires the agent's choice to make a difference, and connected STIT with issues of action, omission, ability and obligation. Around the same time, Ming Xu proved completeness and decidability results for basic STIT systems, including a single-agent logic with Kripke-style semantics and axiomatizations for multi-agent deliberative STIT, thereby establishing STIT as a well-behaved normal modal framework. This early work was systematised in Belnap, Perloff and Xu's monograph Facing the Future: Agents and Choices in Our Indeterminist World, which presents a general branching-time semantics for individual and group STIT operators, discusses independence-of-agents conditions and articulates the metaphysical picture of an indeterministic "tree" of moments. At roughly the same time, Horty's book Agency and Deontic Logic developed deontic STIT logics in which obligations are tied to agents' available choices rather than to static states of affairs, and used the resulting systems to analyse "ought implies can", contrary-to-duty obligations and deontic paradoxes. These works helped to position STIT at the intersection of action theory, temporal logic and deontic logic. From the late 1990s and 2000s onward, STIT logics were combined with epistemic, temporal and strategic modalities. Broersen introduced complete STIT logics for knowledge and action and deontic-epistemic STIT systems that distinguish different modes of mens rea, with applications to responsibility and the specification of multi-agent systems. Work on group and coalitional agency investigated axiomatisations and complexity results for group STIT logics, and related STIT-based analyses of agency to coalition logic and alternating-time temporal logic (ATL) by exhibiting formal embeddings between the frameworks. Explicit temporal operators were added to STIT in so-called temporal STIT logics. Lorini proposed a temporal STIT with "next" and "until" operators along histories and showed how it can be applied to normative reasoning about ongoing behaviour and commitments. Ciuni and Lorini compared different semantics for temporal STIT, clarifying the relationships between branching-time, game-based and epistemic approaches, while Boudou and Lorini gave a semantics for temporal STIT based on concurrent game structures, thus strengthening links with standard models of multi-agent interaction used for ATL and strategy logic. In parallel, complexity-theoretic work by Balbiani, Herzig and Troquard and by Schwarzentruber and co-authors investigated the satisfiability and model-checking problems for various STIT fragments, showing for instance that many expressive group STIT logics are undecidable or of high computational complexity. In the 2010s, STIT ideas were combined with justification logic, imagination operators and refined deontic notions. Justification STIT logics, developed by Olkhovikov and others, merge explicit justifications with STIT-style agency so that producing a proof can itself be treated as an action that brings about knowledge, and they come with completeness and decidability results. Olkhovikov and Wansing introduced STIT imagination logics, together with axiomatic systems and tableau calculi, to model acts of voluntary imagining and their role in doxastic control. Other authors have proposed STIT-based logics of responsibility, blameworthiness and intentionality for use in philosophical and AI settings. Xu's survey article "Combinations of STIT with Ought and Know" (2015) reviews many of these developments and emphasises the interplay between deontic and epistemic STIT logics. Current research on STIT focuses on proof theory, automated reasoning and richer expressive resources. Lyon and van Berkel, building on earlier work on labelled calculi for STIT, have developed cut-free sequent systems and proof-search algorithms that yield syntactic decision procedures for a range of deontic and non-deontic multi-agent STIT logics and support applications such as duty checking and compliance checking in autonomous systems. Sawasaki has proposed first-order cstit-based STIT logics that can distinguish de re and de dicto readings of agency statements and has proved strong completeness results for Hilbert systems over finite models, moving the STIT programme beyond the purely propositional level. Further work investigates interpreted-system and computationally grounded semantics for STIT and its extensions in order to model the behaviour of autonomous agents in multi-agent settings, and proposes STIT-based semantics for epistemic notions based on patterns of information disclosure in interactive systems. == Branching-time semantics == STIT logics are usually interpreted over branching-time models. A standard STIT frame consists of: a non-empty set of moments T {\displaystyle T} , partially ordered by < {\displaystyle <} so that ( T , < ) {\displaystyle (T,<)} forms a tree (every pair of moments with a common predecessor has a greatest lower bound); a set of histories, each history being a maximal linearly ordered subset of T {\displaystyle T} ; a non-empty set of agents A g {\displaystyle Ag} ; for each agent i ∈ A g {\displaystyle i\in Ag} and moment m {\displaystyle m} , a choice function c h o i c e i m {\displaystyle {\mathsf {choice}}_{i}^{m}} that partitions the set of histories passing through m {\displaystyle m} into choice cells. The idea is that a moment represents a time at which choices are made, and histories represent complete possible future courses of events. At each moment, each agent's choice corresponds to selecting one of the available cells of histories determined by their choice function. Formulas are evaluated at pairs ( m , h ) {\displaystyle (m,h)} of a moment and a history through that moment (sometimes written m / h {\displaystyle m/h} ). A valuation assigns truth-values to atomic propositions at such indices; Boolean connectives are interpreted pointwise as in Kripke-style modal logic. == Chellas and deliberative STIT operators == Several STIT operators have been distinguished in the literature. A common approach uses two closely related operators, often called Chellas STIT and deliberative STIT. Let H m {\displaystyle H_{m}} be the set of histories passing through a moment m {\displaystyle m} , and write H m {\displaystyle H_{m}} ⟦ φ ⟧ m = { h ∈ H m ∣ M , m / h ⊨ φ } {\displaystyle {\text{⟦}}\varphi {\text{⟧}}_{m}=\{h\in H_{m}\mid M,m/h\models \varphi \}} for the set of histories at m {\displaystyle m} where φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds. The Chellas STIT operator, often written [ i c s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {cstit}}:\varphi ]} , is given by M , m / h ⊨ [ i c s t i t : φ ] iff c h o i c e i m ( h ) ⊆ ⟦ φ ⟧ m . {\displaystyle M,m/h\models [i\ {\mathsf {cstit}}:\varphi ]\quad {\text{iff}}\quad {\mathsf {choice}}_{i}^{m}(h)\subseteq {\text{⟦}}\varphi {\text{⟧}}_{m}.} Intuitively, agent i {\displaystyle i} sees to it that φ {\displaystyle \varphi } if φ {\displaystyle \varphi } holds at all histories compatible with their present choice. The deliberative STIT operator, [ i d s t i t : φ ] {\displaystyle [i\ {\mathsf {dstit}}:\varphi ]} , adds

  Read more →
• 

  Sumazi

  Sumazi is a social media and social intelligence platform for enterprises, brands, and celebrities. Its technology performs social data analysis across social networking services including Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, to identify key people in his/her network who are experts, influencers or are located in a specific area for marketing, advertising or sales campaigns. The technology company was founded in 2011 by former Sun Microsystems employee Sumaya Kazi. The company was headquartered in San Francisco, California. The company was out of business by 2017. == Reception == Sumazi was one of 25 startups selected out of more than 1,200 to compete at TechCrunch Disrupt Startup Battlefield, where it won the Omidyar Network award for the startup "Most Likely to Change the World." Sumazi, which was based out of San Francisco, California, had been profiled in The New York Times as well as USA Today, which commented the advantages of the startup's location in the Silicon Valley. American Express OPEN Forum also featured Sumazi as a "Startup of the Week". Sumazi has additionally been mentioned in articles by Mashable, The Wall Street Journal, Current Editorials, Harvard Business Review, Smashing Magazine, and TechCrunch.

  Read more →
• 

  Copyright

  A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive legal right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States and fair dealing doctrine in the United Kingdom. Some jurisdictions require "fixing" copyrighted works in a tangible form. It is often shared among multiple authors, each of whom holds a set of rights to use or license the work, and who are commonly referred to as rights holders. These rights normally include reproduction, control over derivative works, distribution, public performance, and moral rights such as attribution. Copyrights can be granted by public law and are in that case considered "territorial rights". This means that copyrights granted by the law of a certain state do not extend beyond the territory of that specific jurisdiction. Copyrights of this type vary by country; many countries, and sometimes a large group of countries, have made agreements with other countries on procedures applicable when works "cross" national borders or national rights are inconsistent. Typically, the public law duration of a copyright expires 50 to 100 years after the creator dies, depending on the jurisdiction. Some countries require certain copyright formalities to establishing copyright, others recognize copyright in any completed work, without a formal registration. When the copyright of a work expires, it enters the public domain. == History == === Background === The concept of copyright developed after the printing press came into use in Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries. It was associated with a common law and rooted in the civil law system. The printing press made it much cheaper to produce works, but as there was initially no copyright law, anyone could buy or rent a press and print any text. Popular new works were immediately re-set and re-published by competitors, so printers needed a constant stream of new material. Fees paid to authors for new works were high and significantly supplemented the incomes of many academics. Printing brought profound social changes. The rise in literacy across Europe led to a dramatic increase in the demand for reading matter. Prices of reprints were low, so publications could be bought by poorer people, creating a mass audience. In German-language markets before the advent of copyright, technical materials, like academic papers and handbooks, were inexpensive and widely available; it has been suggested this contributed to Germany's industrial and economic success. === Conception === The concept of copyright first developed in England. In reaction to the printing of "scandalous books and pamphlets", the English Parliament passed the Licensing of the Press Act 1662, which required all intended publications to be registered with the government-approved Stationers' Company, giving the Stationers the right to regulate what material could be printed. The Statute of Anne, enacted in 1710 in England and Scotland, provided the first legislation to protect copyrights (but not authors' rights). The Copyright Act 1814 extended more rights for authors but did not protect British publications from being reprinted in the US. The Berne International Copyright Convention of 1886 finally provided protection for authors among the countries who signed the agreement, although the US did not join the Berne Convention until 1989. In the US, the Constitution grants Congress the right to establish copyright and patent laws. Shortly after the Constitution was passed, Congress enacted the Copyright Act of 1790, modeling it after the Statute of Anne. While the national law protected authors' published works, authority was granted to the states to protect authors' unpublished works. The most recent major overhaul of copyright in the US, the Copyright Act of 1976, extended federal copyright to works as soon as they are created and "fixed", without requiring publication or registration. State law continues to apply to unpublished works that are not otherwise copyrighted by federal law. This act also changed the calculation of copyright term from a fixed term (then a maximum of fifty-six years) to "life of the author plus 50 years". These changes brought the US closer to conformity with the Berne Convention, and in 1989 the United States further revised its copyright law and joined the Berne Convention officially. Copyright laws allow products of creative human activities, such as literary and artistic production, to be preferentially exploited and thus incentivized. Different cultural attitudes, social organizations, economic models and legal frameworks are seen to account for why copyright emerged in Europe and not, for example, in Asia. In the Middle Ages in Europe, there was generally a lack of any concept of literary property due to the general relations of production, the specific organization of literary production and the role of culture in society. The latter refers to the tendency of oral societies, such as that of Europe in the medieval period, to view knowledge as the product and expression of the collective, rather than to see it as individual property. However, with copyright laws, intellectual production comes to be seen as a product of an individual, with attendant rights. The most significant point is that patent and copyright laws support the expansion of the range of creative human activities that can be commodified. This parallels the ways in which capitalism led to the commodification of many aspects of social life that earlier had no monetary or economic value perse. Copyright has developed into a concept that has a significant effect on nearly every modern industry, including not just literary work, but also forms of creative work such as sound recordings, films, photographs, software, and architecture. === National copyrights === Often seen as the first real copyright law, the 1709 British Statute of Anne gave authors and the publishers to whom they did chose to license their works, the right to publish the author's creations for a fixed period, after which the copyright expired. It was "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or the Purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned." The act also alluded to individual rights of the artist. It began: "Whereas Printers, Booksellers, and other Persons, have of late frequently taken the Liberty of Printing ... Books, and other Writings, without the Consent of the Authors ... to their very great Detriment, and too often to the Ruin of them and their Families:". A right to benefit financially from the work is articulated, and court rulings and legislation have recognized a right to control the work, such as ensuring that the integrity of it is preserved. An irrevocable right to be recognized as the work's creator appears in some countries' copyright laws. The Copyright Clause of the United States, Constitution (1787) authorized copyright legislation: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." That is, by guaranteeing them a period of time in which they alone could profit from their works, they would be enabled and encouraged to invest the time required to create them, and this would be good for society as a whole. A right to profit from the work has been the philosophical underpinning for much legislation extending the duration of copyright, to the life of the creator and beyond, to their heirs. Yet scholars like Lawrence Lessig have argued that copyright terms have been extended beyond the scope imagined by the Framers. Lessig refers to the Copyright Clause as the "Progress Clause" to emphasize the social dimension of intellectual property rights. The original length of copyright in the United States was 14 years, and it had to be explicitly applied for. If the author wished, they could apply for a second 14‑year monopoly grant, but after that the work entered the public domain, so it could be used and built upon by others. === Continental law === In many jurisdictions of the European continent, comparable legal concepts to copyright did exist from the 16th century on but did change under Napoleonic rule into another legal concept: authors' rights or creator's right laws, from French: droits d'auteur and German Urheberrecht. In many modern-day publications the terms copyright and authors' rights are being mixed, or used as translations, but in a juridical sense the legal concepts do essentially differ. Authors' rights are, generally speaking,

  Read more →
• 

  Master/Session

  In cryptography, Master/Session is a key management scheme in which a pre-shared Key Encrypting Key (called the "Master" key) is used to encrypt a randomly generated and insecurely communicated Working Key (called the "Session" key). The Working Key is then used for encrypting the data to be exchanged. Its advantage is simplicity, but it suffers the disadvantage of having to communicate the pre-shared Key Exchange Key, which can be difficult to update in the event of compromise. The Master/Session technique was created in the days before asymmetric techniques, such as Diffie-Hellman, were invented. This technique still finds widespread use in the financial industry, and is routinely used between corporate parties such as issuers, acquirers, switches. Its use in device communications (such as PIN pads), however, is in decline given the advantages of techniques such as DUKPT.

  Read more →
• 

  SmartQVT

  SmartQVT is a unmaintained (since 2013) full Java open-source implementation of the QTV-Operational language which is dedicated to express model-to-model transformations. This tool compiles QVT transformations into Java programs to be able to run QVT transformations. The compiled Java programs are EMF-based applications. It is provided as Eclipse plug-ins running on top of the EMF metamodeling framework and is licensed under EPL. == Components == SmartQVT contains 3 main components: a code editor: this component helps the user to write QVT code by highlighting key words. a parser: this component converts QVT code files into model representations of the QVT programs (abstract syntax). a compiler: this component converts model representations of the QVT program into executable Java programs.

  Read more →
• 

  Forward anonymity

  Forward anonymity is a property of a cryptographic system which prevents an attacker who has recorded past encrypted communications from discovering its contents and participants in the future. This property is analogous to forward secrecy. An example of a system which uses forward anonymity is a public key cryptography system, where the public key is well-known and used to encrypt a message, and an unknown private key is used to decrypt it. In this system, one of the keys is always said to be compromised, but messages and their participants are still unknown by anyone without the corresponding private key. In contrast, an example of a system which satisfies the perfect forward secrecy property is one in which a compromise of one key by an attacker (and consequent decryption of messages encrypted with that key) does not undermine the security of previously used keys. Forward secrecy does not refer to protecting the content of the message, but rather to the protection of keys used to decrypt messages. == History == Originally introduced by Whitfield Diffie, Paul van Oorschot, and Michael James Wiener to describe a property of STS (station-to-station protocol) involving a long term secret, either a private key or a shared password. == Public Key Cryptography == Public Key Cryptography is a common form of a forward anonymous system. It is used to pass encrypted messages, preventing any information about the message from being discovered if the message is intercepted by an attacker. It uses two keys, a public key and a private key. The public key is published, and is used by anyone to encrypt a plaintext message. The Private key is not well known, and is used to decrypt cyphertext. Public key cryptography is known as an asymmetric decryption algorithm because of different keys being used to perform opposing functions. Public key cryptography is popular because, while it is computationally easy to create a pair of keys, it is extremely difficult to determine the private key knowing only the public key. Therefore, the public key being well known does not allow messages which are intercepted to be decrypted. This is a forward anonymous system because one compromised key (the public key) does not compromise the anonymity of the system. == Web of Trust == A variation of the public key cryptography system is a Web of trust, where each user has both a public and private key. Messages sent are encrypted using the intended recipient's public key, and only this recipient's private key will decrypt the message. They are also signed with the senders private key. This creates added security where it becomes more difficult for an attacker to pretend to be a user, as the lack of a private key signature indicates a non-trusted user. == Limitations == A forward anonymous system does not necessarily mean a wholly secure system. A successful cryptanalysis of a message or sequence of messages can still decode the information without the use of a private key or long term secret. == News == Forward anonymity, along with other privacy-protecting measures, received a burst of media attention after the leak of classified information by Edward Snowden, beginning in June, 2013, which indicated that the NSA and FBI, through specially crafted backdoors in software and computer systems, were conducting mass surveillance over large parts of the population of both the United States (see Mass surveillance in the United States), Europe, Asia, and other parts of the world. They justified this practice as an aid to catch predatory pedophiles. Opponents to this practice argue that leaving in a back door to law enforcement increases the risk of attackers being able to decrypt information, as well as questioning its legality under the US Constitution, specifically being a form of illegal Search and Seizure.

  Read more →
• 

  Social collaboration

  Social collaboration refers to processes that help multiple people or groups interact and share information to achieve common goals. Such processes find their 'natural' environment on the Internet, where collaboration and social dissemination of information are made easier by current innovations and the proliferation of the web. Sharing concepts on a digital collaboration environment often facilitates a "brainstorming" process, where new ideas may emerge due to the varied contributions of individuals. These individuals may hail from different walks of life, different cultures and different age groups, their diverse thought processes help in adding new dimensions to ideas, dimensions that previously may have been missed. A crucial concept behind social collaboration is that 'ideas are everywhere.' Individuals are able to share their ideas in an unrestricted environment as anyone can get involved and the discussion is not limited to only those who have domain knowledge. Social collaboration is also known as enterprise social networking, and the products to support it are often branded enterprise social networks (ESNs). It is important that we understand the rhythm of social collaboration. There needs to be a balance, with ease to move from focused solitary work to brainstorming for problem solving in group work. This critical balance can be achieved by creating structures or a work environment where it is not too rigid to prevent brainstorming in group work nor too loose to result in total chaos. Social collaboration should happen at the edge of chaos. Work practices should support social collaboration. The most effective environment is one that supports opportunistic planning. Opportunistic planning provides a general plan but then gives enough room for flexibility to change activities and tasks until the last moment. This way, people are able to cope up with unforeseen developments and not throwing away everything with one grand plan. == Comparison to social networking == Social collaboration is related to social networking, with the distinction that while social networking is individual-centric, social collaboration is entirely group-centric. Generally speaking, social networking means socializing for personal, professional or entertainment purposes, for example, LinkedIn and Facebook. Social collaboration, on the other hand, means working socially to achieve a common goal, for example, GitHub and Quora. Social networking services generally focus on individuals sharing messages in a more-or-less undirected way and receiving messages from many sources into a single personalized activity feed. Social collaboration services, on the other hand, focus on the identification of groups and collaboration spaces in which messages are explicitly directed at the group and the group activity feed is seen the same way by everyone. Social collaboration may refer to time-bound collaborations with an explicit goal to be completed or perpetual collaborations in which the goal is knowledge sharing (e.g. community of practice, online community). == Comparison to crowdsourcing == Social collaboration is similar to crowdsourcing as it involves individuals working together towards a common goal. Crowdsourcing is a method for harnessing specific information from a large, diverse group of people. Unlike social collaboration, which involves much communication and cooperation among a large group of people, crowdsourcing is more like individuals working towards the common goal relatively independently. Therefore, the process of working involves less communication. Andrea Grover, curator of a crowdsourcing art show, explained that collaboration among individuals is an appealing experience, because participation is "a low investment, with the possibility of a high return." == Social collaboration software == Notable social collaboration software includes Glip messaging, Google Apps, Knowledge Plaza Electronic Document System and Social Intranet, Microsoft Lync social collaboration tool for businesses, Slack, Weekdone for managers, and Wrike. == Future == Social collaboration is going to be used as a tool in companies to enhance productivity. Social workers could be able to use social collaboration tools to manage personal tasks, professional projects and social networks with other colleagues within the same organization. Social collaboration will serve as a platform to get people involved and connected. This kind of platform provides a spiritual training practice for social workers. Social collaboration software could help enhance the communication between customers and employees and build trust in the organization. When we need real-time chat, it would be excellent to include every participant in a shared and archived forum which keeps a record of important information and logs. So collaborators need not worry about losing important records while working towards the common goal. The interactive communication and synchronous environment promote understanding among colleagues. Collaboration helps in building strong relationships between workers, which in turn leads to faster problem solving. The close connection between workers and customers creates a scalable organization which naturally increases the trust and faith that customers have in the company. Therefore, the interactive customer relationship levels up customer satisfaction in ways that traditional collaboration methods cannot. Apart from its effect on the way work will be conducted in the future, social collaboration will also affect society. In the coming years social collaboration will be the driving force in societal change as more and more people work together to get their vision across to governments and governing agencies. An example of this is Change.org, an online petition tool where users can help bring their government's attention to pressing social issues that need to be addressed.

  Read more →
• 

  Omni-Path

  Omni-Path Architecture (OPA) is a high-performance communication architecture developed by Intel. It aims for low communication latency, low power consumption and a high throughput. It directly competes with InfiniBand. Intel planned to develop technology based on this architecture for exascale computing. The current owner of Omni-Path is Cornelis Networks. == History == Production of Omni-Path products started in 2015 and delivery of these products started in the first quarter of 2016. In November 2015, adapters based on the 2-port "Wolf River" ASIC were announced, using QSFP28 connectors with channel speeds up to 100 Gbit/s. Simultaneously, switches based on the 48-port "Prairie River" ASIC were announced. First models of that series were available starting in 2015. In April 2016, implementation of the InfiniBand "verbs" interface for the Omni-Path fabric was discussed. In October 2016, IBM, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dell, Lenovo, Samsung, Seagate Technology, Micron Technology, Western Digital and SK Hynix announced a joint consortium called Gen-Z to develop an open specification and architecture for non-volatile storage and memory products—including Intel's 3D Xpoint technology—which might in part compete against Omni-Path. Intel offered their Omni-Path products and components via other (hardware) vendors. For example, Dell EMC offered Intel Omni-Path as Dell Networking H-series, following the naming-standard of Dell Networking in 2017. In July 2019, Intel announced it would not continue development of Omni-Path networks and canceled OPA 200 series (200-Gbps variant of Omni-Path). In September 2020, Intel announced that the Omni-Path network products and technology would be spun out into a new venture with Cornelis Networks. Intel would continue to maintain support for legacy Omni-Path products, while Cornelis Networks continues the product line, leveraging existing Intel intellectual property related to Omni-Path architecture. In 2021, Cornelis announced Omni-Path Express, which replaces PSM2-based drivers and middleware, which trace back to PathScale's PSM created in 2003, for the existing Omni-Path hardware, with a native libfabric provider.

  Read more →
• 

  Color image pipeline

  An image pipeline or video pipeline is the set of components commonly used between an image source (such as a camera, a scanner, or the rendering engine in a computer game), and an image renderer (such as a television set, a computer screen, a computer printer or cinema screen), or for performing any intermediate digital image processing consisting of two or more separate processing blocks. An image/video pipeline may be implemented as computer software, in a digital signal processor, on an FPGA, or as fixed-function ASIC. In addition, analog circuits can be used to do many of the same functions. Typical components include image sensor corrections (including debayering or applying a Bayer filter), noise reduction, image scaling, gamma correction, image enhancement, colorspace conversion (between formats such as RGB, YUV or YCbCr), chroma subsampling, framerate conversion, image compression/video compression (such as JPEG), and computer data storage/data transmission. Typical goals of an imaging pipeline may be perceptually pleasing end-results, colorimetric precision, a high degree of flexibility, low cost/low CPU utilization/long battery life, or reduction in bandwidth/file size. Some functions may be algorithmically linear. Mathematically, those elements can be connected in any order without changing the end-result. As digital computers use a finite approximation to numerical computing, this is in practice not true. Other elements may be non-linear or time-variant. For both cases, there is often one or a few sequences of components that makes sense for optimum precision and minimum hardware-cost/CPU-load.

  Read more →
• 

  Reverse proxy

  In computer networks, a reverse proxy or surrogate server is a proxy server that appears to any client to be an ordinary web server, but in reality merely acts as an intermediary that forwards the client's requests to one or more ordinary web servers. Reverse proxies help increase scalability, performance, resilience, and security, but they also carry a number of risks. Companies that run web servers often set up reverse proxies to facilitate the communication between an Internet user's browser and the web servers. An important advantage of doing so is that the web servers can be hidden behind a firewall on a company-internal network, and only the reverse proxy needs to be directly exposed to the Internet. Reverse proxy servers are implemented in popular open-source web servers. Dedicated reverse proxy servers are used by some of the biggest websites on the Internet. A reverse proxy is capable of tracking IP addresses of requests that are relayed through it as well as reading and/or modifying any non-encrypted traffic. However, this implies that anyone who has compromised the server could do so as well. Reverse proxies differ from forward proxies, which are used when the client is restricted to a private, internal network and asks a forward proxy to retrieve resources from the public Internet. == Uses == Large websites and content delivery networks use reverse proxies, together with other techniques, to balance the load between internal servers. Reverse proxies can keep a cache of static content, which further reduces the load on these internal servers and the internal network. It is also common for reverse proxies to add features such as compression or TLS encryption to the communication channel between the client and the reverse proxy. Reverse proxies can inspect HTTP headers, which, for example, allows them to present a single IP address to the Internet while relaying requests to different internal servers based on the URL of the HTTP request. Reverse proxies can hide the existence and characteristics of origin servers. This can make it more difficult to determine the actual location of the origin server / website and, for instance, more challenging to initiate legal action such as takedowns or block access to the website, as the IP address of the website may not be immediately apparent. Additionally, the reverse proxy may be located in a different jurisdiction with different legal requirements, further complicating the takedown process. Application firewall features can protect against common web-based attacks, like a denial-of-service attack (DoS) or distributed denial-of-service attacks (DDoS). Without a reverse proxy, removing malware or initiating takedowns (while simultaneously dealing with the attack) on one's own site, for example, can be difficult. In the case of secure websites, a web server may not perform TLS encryption itself, but instead offload the task to a reverse proxy that may be equipped with TLS acceleration hardware. (See TLS termination proxy.) A reverse proxy can distribute the load from incoming requests to several servers, with each server supporting its own application area. In the case of reverse proxying web servers, the reverse proxy may have to rewrite the URL in each incoming request in order to match the relevant internal location of the requested resource. A reverse proxy can reduce load on its origin servers by caching static content and dynamic content, known as web acceleration. Proxy caches of this sort can often satisfy a considerable number of website requests, greatly reducing the load on the origin server(s). A reverse proxy can optimize content by compressing it in order to speed up loading times. In a technique named "spoon-feeding", a dynamically generated page can be produced in its entirety and served to the reverse proxy, which can feed the page to the client as the connection allows. The program that generates the page need not remain open, thus releasing server resources during the possibly extended time the client requires to complete the transfer. Reverse proxies can operate wherever multiple web-servers must be accessible via a single public IP address. The web servers listen on different ports in the same machine, with the same local IP address or, possibly, on different machines with different local IP addresses. The reverse proxy analyzes each incoming request and delivers it to the right server within the local area network. Reverse proxies can perform A/B testing and multivariate testing without requiring application code to handle the logic of which version is served to a client. A reverse proxy can add access authentication to a web server that does not have any authentication. == Risks == When the transit traffic is encrypted and the reverse proxy needs to filter/cache/compress or otherwise modify or improve the traffic, the proxy first must decrypt and re-encrypt communications. This requires the proxy to possess the TLS certificate and its corresponding private key, extending the number of systems that can have access to non-encrypted data and making it a more valuable target for attackers. The vast majority of external data breaches happen either when hackers succeed in abusing an existing reverse proxy that was intentionally deployed by an organization, or when hackers succeed in converting an existing Internet-facing server into a reverse proxy server. Compromised or converted systems allow external attackers to specify where they want their attacks proxied to, enabling their access to internal networks and systems. Applications that were developed for the internal use of a company are not typically hardened to public standards and are not necessarily designed to withstand all hacking attempts. When an organization allows external access to such internal applications via a reverse proxy, they might unintentionally increase their own attack surface and invite hackers. If a reverse proxy is not configured to filter attacks or it does not receive daily updates to keep its attack signature database up to date, a zero-day vulnerability can pass through unfiltered, enabling attackers to gain control of the system(s) that are behind the reverse proxy server. Giving the reverse proxy of a third party access to private keys (for caching or optimizing content) places the entire triad of confidentiality, integrity and availability in the hands of the third party who operates the proxy. A reverse proxy is a single point of failure for the back-end services it fronts: an outage caused by misconfiguration, a denial-of-service attack, or a software fault can make every fronted service unreachable to outside clients, even when the back-end services themselves remain healthy. For example, a 2020 outage at Cloudflare briefly took down major sites and services that relied on its reverse-proxy edge, including Discord.

  Read more →
• 

  Harvest now, decrypt later

  Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL) is a surveillance strategy that relies on the acquisition and long-term storage of currently unreadable encrypted data awaiting possible breakthroughs in decryption technology that would render it readable in the future—a hypothetical date referred to as Y2Q (a reference to Y2K), or Q-Day. The most common concern is the prospect of developments in quantum computing which would allow current strong encryption algorithms to be broken at some time in the future, making it possible to decrypt any stored material that had been encrypted using those algorithms. However, the improvement in decryption technology need not be due to a quantum-cryptographic advance; any other form of attack capable of enabling decryption would be sufficient. The existence of this strategy has led to concerns about the need to urgently deploy post-quantum cryptography; even though no practical quantum attacks yet exist, some data stored now may still remain sensitive even decades into the future. As of 2022, the U.S. federal government has proposed a roadmap for organizations to start migrating toward quantum-cryptography-resistant algorithms to mitigate these threats. This new version of Commercial National Security Algorithm Suite uses publicly-available algorithms and is allowed for government use up to the TOP SECRET level. == Terminology and scope == The term “harvest now, decrypt later” encompasses various surveillance or espionage operations in which ciphertext or encrypted communications are collected today with the view that they may one day be decrypted, given sufficient advances in computing power or cryptanalysis. The abbreviation HNDL is sometimes used in technical and policy documents. The “Y2Q” (or “Q-Day”) label draws an analogy to the Y2K date-change issue, emphasising a potential future point at which current cryptography may collapse. The strategy is particularly relevant for data with long confidentiality lifetimes, such as diplomatic communications, personal health records, critical infrastructure logs, or intellectual property. == Mitigation strategies == The primary defense against HNDL attacks is the transition to post-quantum cryptography (PQC), which utilizes algorithms believed to be secure against quantum computer attacks. However, because PQC protects the data payload digitally, rather than the transmission itself, the encrypted data can still be harvested and stored. A complementary approach involves physical layer security (also known as optical layer encryption or photonic shielding). Unlike algorithmic encryption, this method modifies the optical waveform itself—often by burying the signal within optical noise or using spectral phase encoding—to render the transmission unrecordable by standard receivers. By preventing the attacker from capturing a valid signal in the first place, this approach aims to eliminate the "harvest" phase of the threat. Commercial implementations of harvest-proof optical encryption have been developed by firms such as CyberRidge to secure long-haul fiber networks. Field trials have demonstrated 100 Gbps throughput over legacy DWDM networks using this method.

  Read more →
• 

  Service Assurance Agent

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

  Read more →
• 

  Cryptee

  Cryptee is a privacy focused client-side encrypted and cross-platform productivity suite and data storage service. == History == Cryptee was founded in 2017, by John Ozbay, a cybersecurity researcher, commenter, and activist, to exclusively focus on providing a secure document editing service similar to Google Docs and Photos for everyone, with a particular focus on victims and survivors of domestic abuse, journalists and reporters. == Software == Users can write personal documents, notes, journals, store images, videos, and various kinds of other files. The source code of Cryptee is open source and publicly available to allow anyone to audit the service with ease, and help identify errors or potential vulnerabilities in a public and transparent manner. Cryptee has a few key features that differentiate it from other services in the industry, such as its Ghost Folders and Ghost Albums features, built specifically with victims and survivors of domestic abuse, journalists and reporters in mind. Cryptee allows users to hide (ghost) folders for plausible deniability also as known as deniable encryption in the field of cryptography and steganography, and ensure privacy even under coercion. === Features === Cryptee Docs' features include: To-do lists, Markdown support, KaTeX math and file attachments. cross-platform accessible, as it is a progressive web app. Bulk transfer from other note taking apps such as Evernote. Encrypted PDF and print-accurate (A4 and U.S. Letter paper-sized) text editing. Ability to edit docx files Cryptee Photos' features include: Ability to create slideshows. Ability to store original quality of photos. Ability to tag photos for organization. === Commercial strategy === The company's commercial strategy is focused on offering to its users an open source and transparent Photo Storage, Document Editor and Cloud Storage services without trackers or advertisements as it seeks to compete with Google Docs, Google Photos and similar services through its offerings. === Privacy === Cryptee utilizes zero-access storage to safe-keep all users' sensitive digital belongings. == Advocacy == === Lockdown mode === In July 2022, to fortify iPhones against the Pegasus Spyware, Apple announced a new, upcoming Lockdown Mode feature in iOS 16, welcomed by many experts. In the following weeks after Apple's announcement, in August 2022, the Founder and CEO of Cryptee, and privacy activist John Ozbay published their research detailing shortcoming of Apple's Lockdown Mode. They demonstrated that enabling Lockdown Mode makes it possible for all websites and online ads to be able to detect if users have Lockdown Mode enabled or not. This was due to the fact that disabling web fonts (an attack surface) was detectable by websites. === Confrontations against Apple === ==== On PWAs ==== In February 2024, Apple announced plans to kill progressive web apps on iOS devices in the EU, claiming it was to comply with the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The announcement was criticized as anti-competitive by many in the tech industry, including by Tim Sweeney, the CEO of Epic Games. In response, Cryptee started working together with Open Web Advocacy (OWA), an international not-for-profit digital rights group to advocate for the future of the open web, promote web browser choice on mobile operating systems through challenging Apple's anti-competitive third party browser engine ban, and to champion the use and equality of progressive web apps over native apps, by reaching out to the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) team. To better understand the consequences of Apple's decision to kill web apps, the EU announced that they "seek to investigate Apple over cutting off web apps", and that they sent "requests for information to Apple and to app developers, who can provide useful information for our assessment". Apart from sending a response to the EU, Cryptee, along with the OWA, launched an open letter to Tim Cook, which in 48 hours, got thousands of signatories including European Parliament Members Karen Melchior and Patrick Breyer; and thousands of other developers and organizations from over 100 countries. Consequently, 24 hours later, Apple backed off, and reversed course on its plan to cut off progressive web apps in the EU. ==== Ozbay's representations ==== Following the events, eventually on March 18, 2024, Founder and CEO of Cryptee John Ozbay represented the Open Web Advocacy group in European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) hearing for Apple. At the hearing, OWA confronted Apple, accused Apple of "maliciously intending to undermine user choice", and stated that there was no defense for Apple's behavior. In response, according to the tech news outlet Ars Technica, Apple's spokesperson "seemed to dodge Ozbay's question". ==== Cooperation with the EU ==== Within a week of the hearing, the European Union announced a DMA non-compliance investigation against Apple and United States' Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple. A few months later, on June 27, 2024, Cryptee, in cooperation with EDRi — an international advocacy group, along with Article 19 — a British international human rights organization, Privacy International, F-Droid, Free Software Foundation Europe, Guardian Project and others have submitted a comprehensive analysis to the European Commission about how Apple's plans to comply with the Digital Markets Act are insufficient. == Reviews == In a 2018 article, Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch reviewed Cryptee, articulating the fact that Cryptee offers zero-access storage for photos, files, documents and notes, and pointed out that: "Being based in Estonia puts Cryptee outside the “14 eyes jurisdiction,” an international surveillance alliance of European Union and North American countries, making it less likely it will be targeted with demands for data". In addition, the review highlighted Cryptee's Ghost Folders feature which ensures privacy even under coercion. In a 2019 article, Reclaim The Net named Cryptee as one of the "5 great privacy-focused Evernote alternatives to keep your notes safe", underlining that: "When it comes to security, this app is state of the art." and that "When making this app, the developers thought about every aspect of security and have taken every precaution to make it as secure as possible.". The review further underscored Cryptee's open-source nature, its strong encryption, and easy migration features. In a 2021 article, The Verge reviewed Cryptee, pointing out that Cryptee, based out of Europe, is one of the main photo storage service alternatives to Google Photos, and that it's their recommendation for users who are "concerned about privacy and like the idea of encryption" as Cryptee "offers to keep all your photos encrypted using AES-256". In a 2024 article, Beebom, enlisted Cryptee as one of the "7 best iCloud Photos Alternatives for iPhone and iPad", complimenting Cryptee's simplicity, its use of encryption to safeguard users' photos against hacking by not storing any unencrypted data. The article also provided further attention to Cryptee's additional features such as such as Ghost Albums, slideshows, easy-to-use drag and drop uploads, tagging and users' ability to store original-quality photos on Cryptee, concluding that Cryptee is "a safe bet if you are on the lookout for a privacy-centric iCloud Photos alternative".

  Read more →
• 

  Data monetization

  Data monetization, a form of monetization, may refer to the act of generating measurable economic benefits from available data sources (analytics). Less commonly, it may also refer to the act of monetizing data services. In the case of analytics, typically, these benefits accrue as revenue or expense savings, but may also include market share or corporate market value gains. Data monetization leverages data generated through business operations, available exogenous data or content, as well as data associated with individual actors such as that collected via electronic devices and sensors participating in the internet of things. For example, the ubiquity of the internet of things is generating location data and other data from sensors and mobile devices at an ever-increasing rate. When this data is collated against traditional databases, the value and utility of both sources of data increases, leading to tremendous potential to mine data for social good, research and discovery, and achievement of business objectives. Closely associated with data monetization are the emerging data as a service models for transactions involving data by the data item. There are three ethical and regulatory vectors involved in data monetization due to the sometimes conflicting interests of actors involved in the digital supply chain. The individual data creator who generates files and records through his own efforts or owns a device such as a sensor or a mobile phone that generates data has a claim to ownership of data. The business entity that generates data in the course of its operations, such as its transactions with financial institutions or risk factors discovered through feedback from customers also has a claim on data captured through their systems and platforms. However, the person that contributed the data may also have a legitimate claim on the data. Internet platforms and service providers, such as Google or Facebook that require a user to forgo some ownership interest in their data in exchange for use of the platform also have a legitimate claim on the data. Thus the practice of data monetization, although common since 2000, is now getting increasing attention from regulators. The European Union and the United States Congress have begun to address these issues. For instance, in the financial services industry, regulations involving data are included in the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act and Dodd-Frank. Some individual creators of data are shifting to using personal data vaults and implementing vendor relationship management concepts as a reflection of an increasing resistance to their data being federated or aggregated and resold without compensation. Groups such as the Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium, Patient privacy rights, and others are also challenging corporate cooptation of data without compensation. Financial services companies are a relatively good example of an industry focused on generating revenue by leveraging data. Credit card issuers and retail banks use customer transaction data to improve targeting of cross-sell offers. Partners are increasingly promoting merchant based reward programs which leverage a bank’s data and provide discounts to customers at the same time. == Types of data monetization == Internal data monetization - An organization's data is used internally, resulting in economic benefit. This is commonly the case in organizations using analytics to uncover insights, resulting in improved profit, cost savings or the avoidance of risk. Internal data monetization is currently the most common form of monetization, requiring far fewer security, intellectual property, and legal precautions when compared to other types. The potential economic gains from this type of data monetization are limited by the organization's internal structure and situation. External data monetization - A person or organization makes data they possess available on a for-fee basis to external parties, or as a broker for same. This type of monetization is less common and requires various methods to distribute the data to potential buyers and consumers. However, the economic gain that results from collecting data, packaging and distributing it, can be quite large. == Steps == Identification of available data sources – this includes data currently available for monetization as well as other external data sources that may enhance the value of what’s currently available. Connect, aggregate, attribute, validate, authenticate, and exchange data - this allows data to be converted directly into actionable or revenue generating insight or services. Set terms and prices and facilitate data trading - methods for data vetting, storage, and access. For example, many global corporations have locked and siloed data storage infrastructures, which hinders efficient access to data and cooperative and real-time exchange. Perform Research and analytics – draw predictive insights from existing data as a basis for using data for to reduce risk, enhance product development or performance, or improve customer experience or business outcomes. Action and leveraging – the last phase of monetizing data includes determining alternative or improved data centric products, ideas, or services. Examples may include real-time actionable triggered notifications or enhanced channels such as web or mobile response mechanisms. == Pricing variables and factors == A fee for use of a platform to connect buyers and sellers use of a platform to configure, organize, and otherwise process data included in a data trade connecting or including a device or sensor into a data supply chain connecting and credentialing a creator of a data source and a data buyer – often through a federated identity connecting a data source to other data sources to be included in a data supply chain use of an internet service or other transmission services for uploading and downloading data – sometimes, for an individual, through a personal cloud use of encrypted keys to achieve secure data transfer use of a search algorithm specifically designed to tag data sources that contain data points of value to the data buyer linking a data creator or generator to a data collection protocol or form server actions – such as a notification – triggered by an update to a data item or data source included in a data supply chain A price or exchange or other trade value assigned by a data creator or generator to a data item or a data source offered by a data buyer to a data creator assigned by a data buyer for a data item or a data source formatted according to criteria set by a data buyer An incremental fee assigned by a data buyer for a data item or a data set scaled to the reputation of the data creator == Benefits == Improved decision-making that leads to real time crowd sourced research, improved profits, decreased costs, reduced risk and improved compliance More impactful decisions (e.g., make real-time decisions) More timely (lower latency) decisions (e.g., a vendor making purchase recommendations while the customer is still on the phone or in the store, a customer connecting with multiple vendors to discover the best price, triggered notifications when thresholds are reached for data values) More granular decisions (e.g., localized pricing decisions at an individual or device or sensor level versus larger aggregates). Targeted Marketing (e.g., Vendors with access to big data can make targeted advertisements to specific customers within a set data pool decreasing costs for the advertiser and reaching most interested customers) == Frameworks == There are a wide variety of industries, firms and business models related to data monetization. The following frameworks have been offered to help understand the types of business models that are used: Roger Ehrenberg of IA Ventures, a venture capital firm that invests in this sector, has defined three basic types of data product firms: Contributory databases. The magic of these businesses is that a customer provides their own data in exchange for receiving a more robust set of aggregated data back that provides insight into the broader marketplace, or provides a vehicle for expressing a view. Give a little, get a lot back in return – a pretty compelling value proposition, and one that frequently results in a payment from the data contributor in exchange for receiving enriched, aggregated data. Once these contributory databases are developed and customers become reliant on their insights, they become extremely valuable and persistent data assets. Data processing platforms. These businesses create barriers through a combination of complex data architectures, proprietary algorithms, and rich analytics to help customers consume data in whatever form they please. Often these businesses have special relationships with key data providers, that when combined with other data and processed as a whole create valuable differentiation and competitive barriers. Bloomberg is an example of a powerful

  Read more →
• 

  Defence Information Infrastructure

  Defence Information Infrastructure (DII) is a secure military network owned by the United Kingdom's Ministry of Defence MOD. It is used by all branches of the armed forces, including the Royal Navy, British Army and Royal Air Force as well as MOD civil servants. It reaches to deployed bases and ships at sea, but not to aircraft in flight. In 2000, the MOD began to plan the systems replacement project. In March 2005, the MOD gave a contract to the Atlas Consortium, with EDS as prime contractor, for installation and management over 10 years. That has developed into a consortium made up of DXC Technology (formerly EDS), Fujitsu, Airbus Defence and Space (formerly EADS Defence & Security) and CGI (formerly Logica). Starting in May 2016, MOD users of DII begin to migrate to the New Style of IT within the defence to be known as MODNET; again supported by ATLAS. == Overview == DII supports 2,000 MOD sites with some 150,000 terminals (desktops and laptops) and 300,000 user accounts. It is designed to offer a high level of resilience, flexibility, and security in the provision of connectivity from ‘business space to battlespace’ in MOD offices in the UK, bases overseas, at sea, and on the front line. It aims to rationalise and improve IT provision for the defence sector in the 21st century; involving a major culture change for MOD users and their ways of working through a structure of shared working areas with controlled security and access. It should provide a records management system and search facility together with a range of office services. It hosts several hundred COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) and bespoke MOD applications from a range of suppliers judged to meet the required security standards. The network handles alphanumeric data, graphics, and video. The system carries information from Restricted to above-Secret levels, but users are able to see only the data and applications for which they are authorised. == Incremental approach == In order to de-risk the programme Atlas and the MOD took an incremental approach to the development and implementation of DII, with a separate contract for each increment. The extended timeline allowed the MOD flexibility in defining its requirements. Increment 1: Contract awarded March 2005. This covered 70,000 user access devices (UADs) and 200,000 user accounts in the Restricted and Secret domains in 680 fixed locations. Increment 2a: Contract awarded December 2006. This was for an additional 44,000 UADs and 58,000 user accounts in the Restricted and Secret domains, again in fixed locations. Increment 2b: Contract awarded September 2007: This extended DII(F) into the deployed environment with the provision of UADs to support land and maritime deployed operations. Increment 2c: Signed in January 2009. This extended the DII footprint into the above-Secret domain to support a number of key operations and intelligence initiatives. Increment 3a: Contract awarded January 2010. Atlas provided 42,000 UADs operating in the Restricted and Secret domains to the remaining MOD fixed sites. This supported some 60,000 personnel, notably within the RAF, at Joint Helicopter Command and other MOD locations. Increment 3a received an MOD Chief of Defence Materiel commendation. == Costs and transparency == The Ministry of Defence informed Parliament the system would cost £2.3bn, even though it knew the cost would be at least £5.8bn. By 2008 the programme was running at least 18 months late; had delivered only 29,000 of a contracted 63,000 terminals; and had delivered none of the contracted Secret capability. In January 2010 the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence announced that the Ministry of Defence had authorised DII increment 3a at a cost of around £540 million to provide 42,000 terminals within the RAF and at Joint Helicopter Command. He stated that the project would deliver "benefits" worth over £1.6 billion over the 10 years of the contract. That year the project was scheduled to cost at least £7bn, however, the UK government said it might attempt to reduce this sum. By 2014 the rollout of all UK terminals was complete and a refresh of the original desktops and printers to new hardware underway. The overseas rollout was coming to an end and well over half the fleet, including aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, equipped. The final part of Secret capability deployment was scheduled to complete in summer of 2014.

  Read more →