sadat2307/MSciNLI huggingface dataset:
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: 1 Fraction of circuits captured 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 required to agree, denial is optimal when f> (r +1 - c)/c.How­ever, the reduced consensus allows each attacker (r +1 - c) "free" denials of shadows, in that the attacker will remain a viable node.
Sentence 2: attackers may elect to eliminate some number of legitimate nodes without reprisal, but the overall effect of the attack is greatly weakened.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: This sequence falls in the address range of msvcrt.dll, which is being monitored.
Sentence 2: a vaccine is generated as illustrated in Figure 2, The Orignal Packet of Code Red: GET /default.ida?NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u 7801%u909 0%u6858%ucbd3%u7801%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u7801%u9090%u9090%u8190 %u00c3%u0003%u8b00%u531b%u53ff%u0078%u0000%u00=a HTTP/1.0rn A Vaccine Packet for Code Red: GET /default.ida?NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u a001%u9090 %u6858%ucbd3%u 0401%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u 8c01%u9090%u9090%u8190% u00c3%u0003%u8b00%u531b%u53ff%u0078%u0000%u00=a HTTP/1.0rn Figure 2: A vaccine generated from Code Red II worm.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The tcg speci.cation [3] speci.cally state that a tpm can only be manipulated by two operations: 1) when the entire system is rebooted which resets all pcr values and 2) by performing the pcr-Extend operation.
Sentence 2: if a malicious application somehow, manages to change the sml it will not be able to change the pcr values provided that the tpm works according to tcg speci.cation.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The base to the analysis, in the SaTScan tool, is composed of 280 previously collected events.
Sentence 2: when comparing  Table 1: Challenge for Authentication Level Level User s Nature Challenge High Suspect Please, enter your SSN Abnormal Please, enter your login and pass­word Medium Suspect Please, enter your birthday Abnormal Please, enter your driver license number Low Suspect Please, enter/choose your zipcode Abnormal Please, enter/choose your favorite color  Figure 3: Results of SaTScan analytical models the p-value of the two executions of the spatio-temporal per­mutation model (with co-variables and without co-variables), the system .nds the minimum value between them to ana­lyze the worst case (the case that represents a higher risk to the authentication process).
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: 3.4 Protecting the Directory Structure We consider .lenames and the directory tree in which they are organized to be .rst-class meta data in a .le system.
Sentence 2: the name of a .le is security critical with regard to con.dentiality and integrity, as is the information whether or not a speci.c .le is located in a certain directory.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Un­der this assumption, the exact location of the mobile users is hid­den/obfuscated by the above mentioned three strategies.
Sentence 2: the intuition behind our attack is that, if the attacker could freely generate the fake anchor points with new locations, LBSN apps will be a distance oracle that always returns the relative distance with these anchor points to the attacker.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Bit Security for Token Genera­tion Time Bit-level Security 10 days 66 bits 1 month 68 bits Now, if any user in the p2p network is allowed to create only 8 valid identities and if m = 160 then b should be 157 bits and T the threshold of the strength of an identity should be 52.33.
Sentence 2: any call from an identity whose strength is less than 52.33 would be rejected.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: S; furthermore, Step 5 convinces V that 1 = h0 a H0 ß and that Ci = hi a Hi ß for each in­dex i .
Sentence 2: [1, n]  S. V is convinced that exactly d - 1 pairs (hi , Hi ) have loghi Hi = logh0 H0.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: .is .c and .c is ..  By Theorem 5, the time taken to solve WSP1(., .c) (that is, WSP1(=, =)) is O(c(k -1)k + kn), where c is the number of constraints.
Sentence 2: there exists an FPT algorithm to determine whether there exists a plan p in which each user is autho­rized and a constraint that p does not satisfy, since we need only .nd a single disjunct that is true, and each disjunct represents a work.ow speci.cation containing only Type 1 constraints.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: When comparing Tom s attributes to those of Component 1 Code, there are referential links between the user attribute performsJob and the object attribute hasContent, the user attribute hasExpertiseIn and the ob­ject attribute hasContent, and the user attribute assignedTo and the createdUnderProject object attribute.
Sentence 2: the candidate attribute set when just looking at Tom as the .rst user assigned to the software developer role would be cau SD = {(performsJob:software), (assignedTo:Blue), (hasExpertiseIn:java)}.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: P engages V in PK{(a, ß ) : 1 = a = xr mod q and ß = -r mod q: ßhHhH0 0 1 1 a ßa (a) P chooses blinding factors s1, s2 .R Zq *, and then it computes } using not help users circumvent revocation by giving them multiple cre­ dentials.
Sentence 2: the SP can outsource veri.cation to the GM without introducing any new trust assumptions.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: For computing the relationship anonymity bound we .rst ob­serve that the adversary has to break the anonymity of the sender in order to succeed.
Sentence 2: the scenarios in which an ad­versary gains an advantage are a combination of the scenarios from sender anonymity and from recipient anonymity: As long as the probability for choosing entry nodes is not different for different senders, the entry node has to be compromised.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Unlike "the industrial-age model of the consumer " or the producer, "end users are vital and independent stakeholders in the co-creation and value exchange of services and experiences" [39].
Sentence 2: with this idea of an end-user as a mere co-creator of their personal data, a shift has occurred in the relations between the ownership of one s labour, in the form of data (property), privacy and the individual (personhood), to create a "new asset class"[39].
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: In fact, each of these illocutions can be seen as a license state.
Sentence 2: we could cater for negotiations within LiREL without a substantial increase in the computational complexityof LiREL.Forexample, anoffer could look like:  Details of the offer  while an agreement would look like: <license type= agreement > Details of the offer  Other negotiation mechanisms such as auctions and bidding dis­cussed in [5] can also be accommodated by increasing the vocabu­laryof the license states.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: W: The binary watermark sequence resulted from the EXCLUSIVE-OR operation, denoted as ., on A and B. W also has the same structure as X.
Sentence 2:  (2) R(i, j): The hierarchical neighbourhood of the coordinates (i, j) in HH1 band, including not only the conventional 8-neigh-borhood of (i, j), but also two 3 × 3 blocks in HL1 and LH1 bands centred at the corresponding position and the corresponding ancestor of (i, j) in all bands of all higher levels.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: On the other hand, the ISPIT in [11] can be also used to reduce the diameter of the graph representing the partially ordered hierarchy to three, by adding O(p·d·(3 log p)d-1 · log log p) new edges and vertices.
Sentence 2: by using such a technique on the graph HT we obtain a graph HT ++ having diameter three, by adding O(|T|2 ·log |T|·log log |T|)new edges and vertices.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: On such a system, the struct stack_t, as shown in Program 7, will be padded to a multiple of 8 bytes because on 64-bit sys­tems void* and size_t are both 8 bytes (instead of 4 bytes for 32-bit systems), while an integer type remains 4 bytes.
Sentence 2: the size of stack_t is padded to 24 bytes, while on a 32-bit system it remains unpadded at 12 bytes.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Thetypesystemsupportsthedisoveryofanentity's subjet­allattributesthroughaforwardsearhproess thatstartsfromtheentity.Italsosupportssearhing forwardfromanarbitraryattributeexpressiontofnd otherswhosesatisfationisentailedbysatisfationof thefrst.Thus,whenaqueryisposedduringATN,a negotiatoransearhtofndsensitiveattributesthat areentailedbythequery,aswellastheredentialsthat showtheentailment.ThenegotiatorannowapplyAk poliylosureasneededwithrespettotheseredentials toensurethattheAkpoliyheenforesonthequery isadequatelystrong.However,therequireddynami searhproessaddsasignifantburden,andmayopen thedoortoinfereneattaksbasedontiming.Soitis notreommended.
Sentence 2: 4.5 Summary of Steps in Preparing for Ne­gotiation Whiletheoretiallynegotiatorsouldolletonthe fytheredentialsneededduringnegotiation,thetime requiredforthiswouldmakeitimpratial.Inaddition toolletion,itisneessarytoenforeAkpoliylosure withrespettoolletedredentials.anegotiator Nshouldpreparefornegotiationbytakingthefollowing stepsbeforehand: I.Colletredentialsthroughaforwardssearhpro­essstartingfromNitself.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The situation appears even harder for developing countries such as Vietnam where the domestic game industry is still in an infant stage and where most producers/providers of MMOGs are foreign while the domestic companies only act as distributors to serve the domestic clients with game client software and connection to the game server abroad.
Sentence 2: the foreign producers can not actively investigate the domestic environment for finding and fighting against local cheating while the domestic distributor companies who can play a more active role in this fighting cannot directly create solutions by modifying the game client software.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: For 2) we point out that the policy is only enforced for POST requests to other servers running jCSRF.
Sentence 2: assuming that 1) does not happen and that the web developers has correctly con.gured the list of allowed origins, every same-origin request and every cross-origin re­quest to a protected website will bear a valid authentication token and will thus be allowed.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Although it may be impossible to optimally anticipate the needs of each user at any place at any time, ubiquitous computing will enable such systems to help people to cope with an expanding array of choices [10].
Sentence 2: the recommendation approach, which proved to be successful to PC users, cannot be straightforwardly ap­plied for mobile users due to the obstacles that are typically present in mobile usage environments, such as: limitation of mobile devices and wireless networks, impact from external environment, and behavior characteristics of mobile users [16].
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: As the precision for predicting the relationships in the 20NG dataset (59.0%) is higher than in the ODP46 dataset (31.8%), the probability of wrongly lowering a true positive is higher in the OPD46 dataset.
Sentence 2: misclassification information is only useful in an ontology where the number of relationships between categories is relatively low.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Moreover, the private storage requirement for each user can be signi.cantly reduced because each user only needs to hold two group elements in our proposed scheme, and the storage requirement or transmission requirement for the system can also be reduced because the logarithmic fac­tor is removed from the size of the published information.
Sentence 2: our scheme can be used in wireless sensor networks because the performance of our scheme is really close to the broadcast encryption scheme proposed in [12].
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: If there are more than 2|CNMK| CNs, at least two CNs willhavethesameCNMK.ThetwoCNs caninfactbe grouped as oneCN,because any abnormal transition among the two CNs cannot be denied by the access control algo­rithms.
Sentence 2: the application code in a sensor has at most 2|CNMK| e.ective CNs.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: For example, in Section 4 we show that a user s touch be­havior is slightly di.erent when he is .nding POI in maps as compared to browsing.
Sentence 2: in the banking appli­cation, if the classi.er is aware of the task being performed by the user (.nding nearest ATM or querying his account), it may use this additional information to improve its accuracy by tuning its features (we demonstrate this in Section 5).
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The encryption scheme .XOR,F has been shown to be secure in the sense of IND-P1-C0 (see [5, 26]), assuming that F is a pseudorandom function family.
Sentence 2: .XOR,F could be used to obtain a time-bound hierarchical key assignment scheme secure in the sense of IND-ST. Notice that if the message x to be encrypted has length t, the XOR construction reduces to compute the ciphertext as r||y,where y = F.(r) .x and r is a random string of t bits.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: It turns out that the SDK behaves just like the Facebook app during the app registration phase: it issues a start-service intent to any recipient that declares an action com.amazon.device.messaging.intent.REGISTER; also the intent contains a PendingIntent object for the ADM service app to identify the sender of the intent.
Sentence 2: an attack app with the action and a higher priority in receiving messages can intercept the intent and steal the PendingIntent.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Maat also assume that each OSD can associate local object IDs with global .leidenti.ers: usingCRUSH[34],anOSD canmap a global .le identi.er to the object IDs and locations of the objects that contain the .le data.
Sentence 2: maat can issue ca­pabilities that identify .les, which OSDs can later associate with objectIDsinI/O requests.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The observation is that T can .rst operate on the encrypted data sent by Alice, i.e., Epka (x), using additive homomorphic proper­ties and applies the PRE scheme on the updated data.
Sentence 2: the combinationofadditive homomorphic propertieswiththePRE schemewillbeni.tthedataownerstoshifttheworkloadtoT (i.e., the cloud who is computationally unbounded) and will provide a medium for T tooperate on the encrypted data.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Forexample,it may notbeknowninadvancewhattheIP address range of a particular enterprise network is in which thecatalogueisbeing applied to, orif aserverislistening on adi.erentportfromtheIANA[19] recommendeddefault.
Sentence 2: template semantic threat graph individuals are de.ned as place holders for unknown knowledge.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: a(x).if h(s, fst(x)) = snd(x) then b(fst(x)) Here the value M is signed by hashing it with the fresh name s. Although (M, h(s, M)) travels on the public chan­nel a, no other process can extract s from this, or produce (N, h(s, N)) for some other N using the available functions.
Sentence 2: we may reason that only the intended term M will be forwarded on channel b.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Unaware of the context and the semantics of the CDC message that is being processed, the guard heavily relies on rudimentary .ltering techniques.
Sentence 2: the information domains are rendered vulnerable to an array of attacks, and counter­ing these attacks often necessitates time-consuming human intervention to adjudicate messages in order to meet the desired security and privacy requirements of the communi­cating domains.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: With this tech­nique, we can notably reduce the power of an attack even if the attacker has compromised a large percent of the sam­ple and knows the aggregation procedure in detail.
Sentence 2: the RANSAC paradigm can be especially useful in sensor networks, where the nodes are unattended and lack physical protection, and therefore they can be compromised in large quantities.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Furthermore, due to various di.erences between notions of simulation, there have been con.icting relative expressiveness results that are di.cult to reconcile [24, 25].
Sentence 2: none of this prior work supports the comparison of access control systems with regards to their ability to perform well within a particular environment, a lack which was pointed out by a recent NIST technical report [13].
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: As for the high-quality decision of task protection, obviously it will be necessary it is possible to present a few adaptive agents and mean of protection as much - agents system, in natural way there is a requirement of ability automatically to solve conflict situations.
Sentence 2: the basic principles of conception of preventive active protection will be: activity, self-training, noninteraction, confidentiality, integrity, availability for the sanctioned users, complexity, intellectuality, self-testing, co-operation with similar ones, automatic removal of conflicts.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: In our case, the service provider s TCB must include at a minimum any code which has the opportunity to modify sensor data on the mobile device at any point from when it is extracted from hardware until it is signed by trusted local code before being submitted to a remote veri.er.
Sentence 2: sensor device drivers as well as any running applications or libraries which are able to modify the data must be included.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Finally, the garbled circuit size is polynomial in the size of the input circuit passed to Gb.Garble, which in turn is polynomial in sksizeFHE and ctsizeFHE.
Sentence 2: we obtain the overall ciphertext size of FE: ctsizeFE = ctsizeFHE · ctsizeABE(pksizeFHE + n · ctsizeFHE + poly(.))
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Since the sensors do not route the data to the sink or ren­dezvous points in our approach, the attacker does not gain any extra information about the sink s location by reading the packet header or observing the data tra.c.
Sentence 2: the probability for him to locate the sink will be equal to that with a random guess, that is 1/225 in both attack types (1) and (2).
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: As shown in Fig.4, the others would be Holder-of-Assertion Subject Con.rmation methods further enabling the Assertion to be claimed by any entity, who can prove their right by producing the required supporting Assertion.
Sentence 2: this Dependent Assertion can be claimed by and e.ec­tively, is delegated to any entity who can satisfy the Depen­dency requirements.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: However, only verifying one digest in step (3) takes more than 10 seconds, on a small graph with 16 edges, and there are 2m such veri.cations to be performed, thus it is not practical at this time.
Sentence 2: although the complexity of the algorithm is O(m log2 n), the constants involved are really large due to the veri.cation scheme used.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Udom0 can delegate its privileges to service domains (SDs), which are special-purpose user domains that can perform privileged system services on UdomUs.
Sentence 2: clients can leverage SDs to implement services such as memory introspec­tiontoverifyVMintegrity,intrusion detection,and storage encryp­tion.Ina traditional cloud, these serviceswouldbe implementedin dom0,andwouldhavetobedeployedbythe cloudprovider.SSC allows clients to .exibly deploynewservices and control their own VMs using SDs.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Even though at this stage, the .eld of genomics is gener­ally free of serious attacks, it is likely that the above threats will become more serious as the number of sequenced in­dividuals becomes larger.
Sentence 2: the need to adapt privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) [16] to personal ge­nomic data will continue to grow with time, as they are key tools for preventing an adversary from linking particular ge­nomic data to a speci.c person or from inferring privacy­sensitive genomic data about a person.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: When attempting to measure the volume from 2 ft distance, we found that the clicks were too low to be registered by the sound level meter and no dif­ference in the SPL measurements were visible on our sound meter (Radio Shack Sound Level Meter model 33-2055).
Sentence 2: we see that the audio sound of the button click is very feeble from a distance of a few feet away and adds to the challenge of eavesdrop­ping on the cell phone button clicks.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: (S) and that r is chosen uniformly at random from {0, 1}£n+£Ø, thevalue A ' is dis­tributed statistically closeto uniformover Z* .
Sentence 2: the user could n compute a fresh A ' each time, reveal it, and then run the protocol ' µL-1 'e PK{(e,.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: The reason is that the behavior exhibited by a sample can signi.cantly depend on the date/time of analysis and the availability of remote resources.
Sentence 2: for a fair evaluation of HASTEN, we re-ran each of the samples twice: First, we performed a redundancy run with iden­tical settings compared to the base run; in parallel, we conducted a test run using HASTEN.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: Observe that the case with one SSoD policy and an arbitrary number of resiliency policies is coNP-hard, and the case with one resiliency policy and an arbi­trary number of SSoD policies is NP-hard.
Sentence 2: it is un­likely that the general case is in NP or in coNP; however, we show that the problem is in NPNP .
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: As mentioned previously, this corresponds to the case where all the neighbors of these observers have received TRV .rst and as such they will not forward TRA back to the ob­servers.
Sentence 2: v needs to employ a considerable number of observers ( 3) (that connect to a large number of Bitcoin peers) to ensure that at least one observer detects any double-spending at­tempt; this, however, comes at the expense of additional costs for V to maintain the observers in the network.
Relationship: reasoning
Domain: Security and privacy
Sentence 1: It is already known that CCA secure public key encryption (PKE) can be generically constructed from CPA secure PKE and ((simulation-sound) non-interactive zero-knowledge proof ) via the Naor-Yung or Dolev-Dwork-Naor transforms.
Sentence 2: one can also imme­diately construct CCA secure PKE from CPA secure KEM by converting CPA secure KEM into CPA secure PKE and transforming it to be CCA secure PKE.
Relationship: reasoning