Congress wants the federal government to have a plan in place for protecting federal IT systems and assets from future hacks carried out by quantum computers.

To be clear, computer scientists at the National Institute for Standards and Technology believe the tangible threat of quantum codebreaking is still years away, but the widespread replacement of much of the older, classical encryption underpinning systems and data is likely to come during the next few years.

The Quantum Computing Cybersecurity Preparedness Act, sponsored by Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif.; Nancy Mace, R-S.C.; and Gerry Connolly, D-Va., would force the civilian federal government to develop a concerted strategy to tackle this replacement. The bill, which Khanna first referenced during a January House Oversight Committee hearing, would give the Office of Management and Budget a year from the time NIST finalizes its post-quantum encryption standards (expected later this year) to begin prioritizing the migration of devices and systems at civilian federal agencies. It also requires OMB to begin developing a list of high-risk systems and assets that will be prioritized for replacement.

The director of OMB would be responsible for delivering a report updating Congress on the governments progress, the potential cybersecurity risks posed by quantum computers, the amount of estimated funding needed to replace encryption for government systems and devices and U.S. coordination on post-quantum encryption with other international standards bodies.

Even though classical computers cant break encryption now, our adversaries can still steal our data in the hopes of decrypting it later," Khanna said in a statement. "Thats why I believe that the federal government must begin strategizing immediately about the best ways to move our encrypted data to algorithms that use post-quantum cryptography."

Mace said that while she was "optimistic" about the potential benefits of quantum computing "we must take preemptive steps to ensure bad actors aren't able to use this technology in more sinister ways."

Any such strategy, the bill posits in a sense of Congress, should involve the government and private sector coming together to develop software, hardware and applications that facilitate what is known as crypto agility" or the ability to easily switch out one post-quantum encryption algorithm for another with minimal loss to performance or interoperability. This capability is critical because so much of quantum computing and code breaking is still largely theoretical at this point.

Until a working quantum computer advanced enough to break classical encryption comes along, officials at NIST working on the next wave of encryption are basing their algorithmic choices, in part, on mathematical estimations of what those computers might do.

That means that the algorithms we think will protect us may actually fall short and, in fact, NIST official Dustin Moody told SC Media last year that each round of their post-quantum cryptography selection process has revealed a previously unknown or unforeseen weakness in one of the algorithms.

The work required to switch out such algorithms and implement crypto agility, where possible, is expected to be a long, grueling multi-year process. While the threat of quantum codebreaking mostly applies to public key encryption, most organizations dont have good visibility over the kinds of encryption they rely on.

A lot of people dont have any real sense of where [their public key encryption] are deployed in their systems, Bill Newhouse, a NIST cybersecurity engineer said last year to the Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board. The non-technical folks that rely on them probably just dont really recognize that it's all going to be rather complicated.

View post:
Congress wants a plan for post-quantum hacking threats for federal IT systems - SC Media

There are very few people in the world who have direct access to the Queen - for obvious security reasons - but it turns out Her Majesty has two people she regularly speaks to on the phone

Image: PA)

It goes without saying that the Queen is no ordinary person, so you can't just pick up the phone to be able to speak to her - not even some of her closest family.

There are strict rules in place for anyone who wishes to contact the Queen, as it could create a huge security threat if anyone were able to reach the monarch.

Luckily technology has moved on a lot over the last few years, which means Her Majesty is now able to have a personal mobile phone which is protected against hackers - but she only uses it to contact two people.

MyLondon reports that the Queen has two people she regularly speaks to on her mobile phone, but they're not necessarily the people you might expect.

Image:

Image:

Royal expert Jonathan Sacerdoti said the two people who have access to the royal via her mobile are her daughter Princess Anne and her racing manager, John Warren.

Speaking to Royally US, Sacerdoti explained: "Apparently the Queen has two people who she speaks to the most on her phones and she also apparently has a mobile phone which is said to be Samsung packed with anti-hacker encryption by MI6 so nobody can hack into her phone.

"But the two people she phones the most are said to be her daughter Princess Anne and her racing manager John Warren."

The Queen is said to be very close friends with Warren, who is married to the Earl of Carnarvon's sister, Lady Carolyn Warren, and owns and runs the stud at Highclere Castle - the home that famously doubles as Downton Abbey.

The pair have regularly been seen chatting and laughing at events and Warren recently praised his friend for being inducted into the QIPCO British Champions Series Hall of Fame for her dedication to horse breeding.

He said: "I suspect that the Queen will have a lot of inner pride in being invited into the Hall of Fame. The Queen's contribution to racing and breeding derives from a lifelong commitment. Her love of horses and their welfare comes with a deep understanding of what is required to breed, rear, train and ride a thoroughbred.

"Her Majesty's fascination is unwavering and her pleasure derives from all of her horses - always accepting the outcome of their ability so gracefully."

Do you have a story to share? We want to hear all about it. Email us at yourmirror@mirror.co.uk

Read More

Read More

See original here:
Queen has encrypted mobile phone - but she only uses it to call two people - The Mirror

Fool-proof encryption is a basic human right and essential for secure data exchanges.

In a recent report Meta, formerly known as Facebook, stated that it is rolling out default end-to-end encryption in 2023. This is precise because Meta, Businesses for Social Responsibility, a non-profit organization considers encryption as a basic human right and essential for secure data exchanges. However, encryption algorithms become weak over time by developing security holes, putting data at risk. Encryption techniques are essentially used to protect unauthorised access to the privy data by third parties. To prevent eavesdropping, the data is overlaid by an encryption key, so that the data is not the same data for people who do not have access to the key. The standard algorithms include the Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA), and Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm, which protect data and are capable of withstanding more advanced cyber-attacks. However, in view of emerging technologies like block-chain, quantum computing, and cloud computing, the conventional protocols designed fall inadequate for ensuring data privacy. Meanwhile, the researchers are finding ways to bypass the advanced code-cracking technologies to ensure that the big data remains within the confines of safety. Here are some examples:

Quantum computers use qubits unlike the 0s and 1s of conventional computing. Therefore, the computing power is way superior to the normal computers, including in performing mathematical problems that underpin the modern encryption algorithms. Researchers have known for decades that if a large-scale quantum computer could be built, it could do some pretty big calculations that would threaten the cryptosystems that we rely on today for security, says Dustin Moody, a mathematician at NIST, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology. The quantum-proof encryption uses lattice-based cryptography with enormous grids and billions of individual points across thousands of dimensions. Breaking the code would require moving along a set of random points. Unless you know the route, it is highly impossible to break the code.

In order to see original data, encrypted data should be decrypted and this very process can make it vulnerable to breach. Homomorphic encryption has a solution to overcome these encryption holes. It basically involves masking the data with algebraic functions for data manipulation which lets the data remain encrypted while being used. The person on the other end has to use a private key along with the public key in order to access the data. Homomorphic encryption is particularly functional in cases of protecting personal data without having third parties like Google or companies who do not have a direct relationship with the data, involve in the transaction. This encryption is particularly useful in healthcare and defence industries, where personal data is of utmost precious.

Unlike end-to-end encryption differential, privacy encryption uses mathematical noise to mask the original calculations used in the algorithm. The noise terms are large enough for individual variables but small enough for the pattern to be revealed. Craig Gentry, an American computer scientist describes homomorphic encryption as a glovebox. Anybody can put their hands into it and manipulate it but cannot make the final product out. Only the person with the key can take the finished product, once the product is ready. American Census Bureau is actively applying this technique to protect its citizens data while making it available for lawmakers to plan for policies.

Cryptography for blockchain technology is definitely the hottest area, where many players are putting their currency in. Given the openness and the stakes it holds in terms of monetary value, blockchain is one of the most vulnerable technologies. Till recently block-chain technologies used protocols based on digital signatures to authenticate transactions. These protocols require one key to sign in for all the transactions pertaining to an account. Of late, protocols like ZK-Snark, an example of a zero-knowledge proof protocol, are being applied which enable to confirm of a transaction without having to reveal the identity. ZoKrates, a toolbox used for implementing ZK-Snark protocol on Ethereum helps the user with verifiable computation on DApp. While the earlier protocols only helped with user identification, the latest ones add layers of software to track the entire course of transactions.

Share This ArticleDo the sharing thingy

About AuthorMore info about author

More:
Ingenious Ways of Encryption that Ensure Privacy of Big Data - Analytics Insight

A technical solution has been patented, but is refuted. Thetechnical solution is important to the applicant. With regard towhether the technical solution canbepatented again or not?There have recently been differentcustomers who present such questions.

It should be noted that, the applicant can start areexaminationprogram for incompliancewith the rejection determination, and can also complain aboutincompliance with the reexamination determination of the patent ofthe invention in the case that the reexamination program maintainsthe rejection determination. If the applicant does not use, or doesnot intend to use, the described rescue means, or the final officeafter using the described rescue means decides to be the backbackedpatent application, it is advised whether to apply for patent nolonger for the technical solution?

If the technical solution is greatly improved, a new solution isformed, which does not belong to the prior art, and the patentapplication may be considered. If the technical solutionessentially does not change, only the description manner ischanged, and the earlier application affects the novelty of thelater application, and the patent application is not advised.

If the technical solution itself is not greatly improved,however, since the original application text of the earlierapplication does not highlight the point of the invention which theapplicant wants to emphasize this time, the applicant wishes toapply for a patent again, and whether to apply for a patent againis advised; and if it is advised to apply for a patent, it isnecessary to pay attention to what kind of patent?

In recent years, the writer has encountered such a case. Thetechnical solution provided by the applicant relates to the fieldof communications, and relates to a method forencrypting/decrypting data by means of a network device without anIP address and a MAC address. The prior application is proxied byother agency. The independent method claims of the priorapplication are as follows:

intercepting a target data packet transmitted by a data packetsending device to a data packet receiving device;

Performing preset processing on the target data packet, andgenerating a processed data packet of which the data amount is lessthan the MTU amount of a communication network;

Transmitting the processed data packet to the data packetreceiving apparatus.

The applicant is of the opinion that the earlier applicationdoes not highlight that the encryption/decryption operation isrealized by a network device without IP address and MAC addresses,and wishes to apply for a patent again with regard to the technicalsolution. In this case, the applicant has the followingthought:

(1)Re-applying a patent for thistechnical solution?

Firstly, it is necessary to compare the technical solution withthe full text of the initial application documents of the earlierapplications, The earlier application only discloses processing adata packet as a data packet less than an MTU amount via anintermediate device, but does not disclose that a communicationintermediate device is a device without IP address and MACaddresses, also does not disclose respectively encrypting anddecrypting same by two encryption/decryption devices between a datapacket sending device and a receiving device, That is, the featuresof the encryption/decryption device in the technical solution andthe application scenario of the technical solution are notdisclosed.

Secondly, the present technical solution needs to be comparedwith the prior art closest to the earlier application (D1 providedby the examiner), Reference document D1 discloses that nodes A andB can actively send a test message, and the length of an MTU isset, However, a network device without the IP address and the MACaddress does not have the capability of actively sending a datapacket, and cannot control the length of the sent data packet incommunication, Accordingly, the characteristics of the node in D1are completely different from those of the network device in thepresent application.

Further, it is also required to search for whether there is acloser prior art after the earlier application, and by means of thesearch, if no closer prior art is found, it can be preliminarilyjudged that the present technical solution is novel.

By means of evaluation, the present technical solution, by meansof a method for performing encryption/decryption on a networkdevice without an IP address and a MAC address, not only can ensurethat the length of a data packet after an encryption/decryptionoperation does not change with the length of an original datapacket, but also can ensure the synchronization and security ofparameter data required for data encryption/decryption; preliminaryjudgement involves an inventive step; therefore, the presenttechnical solution is advised to make a patent applicationagain.

(2)With regard to the technical solution application, attentionneeds to be paid to something?

First of all, an application scenario of performingencryption/decryption by using a network device without an IPaddress and a MAC address is the largest inventive point, a set ofsystem claims can be laid out, and the system independent claimslaid out are as follows:

A first network device, configured to send to a second networkdevice to-be-processed data;

A first encryption and decryption device connected to the firstnetwork device and used for receiving the data to be processed,encrypting the data to be processed to obtain encrypted data havingthe same length as the data to be processed, and transmitting theencrypted data to the second network device via a network, whereinthe first encryption and decryption device is a network devicewithout an IP address and a MAC address;

A second encryption and decryption device, connected to thesecond network device, and configured to receive the encrypted datathrough the network, decrypt the encrypted data to obtain decrypteddata, and transmit the decrypted data to the second network device,wherein the second encryption and decryption device is a networkdevice having no IP address and MAC address;

a second network device, configured to receive the decrypteddata.

Secondly, the encryption method and the decryption method inthis application scenario are also inventive points, andcorresponding method claims may be respectively arranged from bothsides of the encryption end and the decryption end.

Further, the layout of dependent claims is in communication withthe inventor, the encryption algorithm in the present technicalsolution is the same as the encryption algorithm in the earlierapplication, the instructor guides the inventor to improve andextend the encryption algorithm, proposes an encryption algorithmdifferent from the earlier application, and is deployed independent claims.

Finally, the patent application corresponding to the technicalsolution is granted a patent.

In conclusion, a patent application corresponding to onetechnical solution is refuted, but the technical solution has agreat value to the applicant, and a patent attorney can beconsulted about whether the technical solution can perform a patentapplication again. With regard to a patent agent, on the onehand,the technical solution can be compared with the prior art atfirst (including, but not limited to, the technical solutiondisclosed in the earlier application and the reference document ofthe earlier application), Insofar as the technical solution differsgreatly from the prior art, the applicant can be advised to make apatent application again. On the other hand, the inventor can beguided to mine and extend the technical solution,and re-determiningthe technical problem and the necessary technical features forsolving the technical problem, and reasonably performing patentlayout, The patent application for this technical solution also hasthe opportunity to obtain patent rights.

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

See more here:
Whether The Technical Solutions Corresponding To The Refuted Patent Application Can Also Apply For Patent - Intellectual Property - China - Mondaq

Google announced a major update to Google Meet today that includes a number of long-requested features and plenty that you didnt even know you needed. There is a long list here, but the main additions are likely in-meeting reactions to give immediate updates to the Meet companion mode, emoji-based feedback, the ability to use Meet right inside of Docs, Sheets and Slides, as well as a new picture-in-picture mode so you can more easily ignore a meeting and the ability to stream a meeting to YouTube.

Security is another highlight of todays announcement. Starting in May, Google is rolling out client-side encryption in Meet, which is currently still in beta. With this, users have full control over the encryption keys and the identity provider used to access those keys. Later this year, Google will also introduce option end-to-end encryption for all meetings. Currently, all Meet data is encrypted in transit.

Image Credits: Google

Since 2020, its become increasingly clear that human connection is crucial, said Dave Citron, Googles director of product management for Google Meet and Voice in a press briefing ahead of todays announcement. We know we need solutions that help people build connections that can bridge the gap between physical spaces and the somewhere else.

He noted that a lot of these updates today focus on collaboration equity, that is, the ability to contribute to meetings regardless of location, role, experience level, language and device preference. One example for this is companion mode, which launched earlier this year and allows users to join a video meeting on a second screen. Now, Google is updating this with personal video tiles for every participant in a hybrid meeting, even if they are in a conference room with other participants. This update will work towards making those in physical space have the same experience as those who are working remotely, Citron explained.

Image Credits: Google

Like too many features Google announces these days, these updates will roll out later this year. This also means youll have to wait until next month to regale your co-workers with emojis during a meeting to help teams celebrate wins, offer support and share the love, as a Google spokesperson called it.

Picture-in-picture mode will also roll out next month, while automatic noise cancellation on Google Meet hardware is now rolling out to all users on Meet-enabled Logitech, Acer and Asus hardware.

The ability to stream to YouTube, which most companies will probably use for webinars and similar outward-facing meetings, is coming later this year.

Google also today announced a couple of updates to Spaces, but youre probably using Slack, so you can find more information about those here.

Image Credits: Google

Continue reading here:
Google Meet gets in-meeting reactions, PiP, end-to-end encryption and more - TechCrunch