We present a novel approach for blockchain asset owners to reclaim their funds in case of accidental private-key loss or transfer to a mistyped address. Our solution can be deployed upon failure or absence of proactively implemented backup mechanisms, such as secret sharing and cold storage.
To understand the effects of demographic attributes on attacker behavior in stolen social accounts, we devised a method to instrument and monitor such accounts. We then created, instrumented, and deployed more than 1000 Facebook accounts, and exposed them to criminals.
Secure multiparty computations enable the distribution of so-called shares of sensitive data to multiple parties such that the multiple parties can effectively process the data while being unable to glean much information about the data (at least not without collusion among all parties to put back together all the shares).
FastPay allows a set of distributed authorities, some of which are Byzantine, to maintain a high-integrity and availability settlement system for pre-funded payments. It can be used to settle payments in a native unit of value (crypto-currency), or as a financial side-infrastructure to support retail payments in fiat currencies. FastPay is based on Byzantine Consistent Broadcast as its core primitive, foregoing the expenses of full atomic commit channels (consensus).
In this paper we establish empirical grounding on how both ordinary users and attackers use IPv6 in practice, compared with IPv4. Using data on benign and abusive accounts at a large online platform, we conduct user-centric analyses that assess the spatial and temporal properties of users’ IP addresses, and IP-centric evaluations that characterize the user populations on IP addresses.
We showed that steganography models proposed for vision are less suitable for speech, and propose a new model that includes the short-time Fourier transform and inverse-short-time Fourier transform as differentiable layers within the network, thus imposing a vital constraint on the network outputs.
This paper analyses security of concrete instantiations of EdDSA by identifying exploitable inconsistencies between standardization recommendations and Ed25519 implementations. We mainly focus on current ambiguity regarding signature verification equations, binding and malleability guarantees, and incompatibilities between randomized batch and single verification.