March 28, 2022
Kannan Subbiah
FCA | CISA | CGEIT | CCISO | GRC Consulting | Independent Director | Enterprise & Solution Architecture | Former Sr. VP & CTO of MF Utilities | BU Soft Tech | itTrident
“We know very little about quantum computers and noise, but we know really well how this molecule behaves when excited,” said Hu. “So we use quantum computers, which we don’t know much about, to mimic a molecule which we are familiar with, and we see how it behaves. With those familiar patterns we can draw some understanding.” This operation gives a more ‘bird’s-eye’ view of the noise that quantum computers simulate, said Scott Smart, a Ph.D. student at the University of Chicago and first author on the paper. The authors hope this information can help researchers as they think about how to design new ways to correct for noise. It could even suggest ways that noise could be useful, Mazziotti said. For example, if you’re trying to simulate a quantum system such as a molecule in the real world, you know it will be experiencing noise—because noise exists in the real world. Under the previous approach, you use computational power to add a simulation of that noise. “But instead of building noise in as additional operation on a quantum computer, maybe we could actually use the noise intrinsic to a quantum computer to mimic the noise in a quantum problem that is difficult to solve on a conventional computer,” Mazziotti said.
Running container-based applications in production goes well beyond Kubernetes. For example, IT operations teams often require additional services for tracing, logs, storage, security and networking. They may also require different management tools for Kubernetes distribution and compute instances across public clouds, on-premises, hybrid architectures or at the edge. Integrating these tools and services for a specific Kubernetes cluster requires that each tool or service is configured according to that cluster’s use case. The requirements and budgets for each cluster are likely to vary significantly, meaning that updating or creating a new cluster configuration will differ based on the cluster and the environment. As Kubernetes adoption matures and expands, there will be a direct conflict between admins, who want to lessen the growing complexity of cluster management, and application teams, who seek to tailor Kubernetes infrastructure to meet their specific needs. What magnifies these challenges even further is the pressure of meeting internal project deadlines — and the perceived need to use more cloud-based services to get the work done on time and within budget.
Both polycloud and sky computing are strategies for managing the complexities of a multicloud deployment. Which model is better? Polycloud is best at leveraging the strengths of each individual cloud provider. Because each cloud provider is chosen based on its strength in a particular cloud specialty, you get the best of each provider in your applications. This also encourages a deeper integration with the cloud tools and capabilities that each provider offers. Deeper integration means better cloud utilization, and more efficient applications. Polycloud comes at a cost, however. The organization as a whole, and each development and operations person within the organization, need deeper knowledge about each cloud provider that is in use. Because an application uses specialized services from multiple providers, the application developers need to understand the tools and capabilities of all of the cloud providers. Sky computing relieves this knowledge burden on application developers. Most developers in the organization need to know and understand only the sky API and the associated tooling and processes.
领英推荐
The Biden administration and the European Commission said in a joint statement issued on Friday that the new framework "marks an unprecedented commitment on the U.S. side to implement reforms that will strengthen the privacy and civil liberties protections applicable to U.S. signals intelligence activities." Signals intelligence involves the interception of electronic signals/systems used by foreign targets. In the new framework, the U.S. reportedly will apply new "safeguards" to ensure signals surveillance activities "are necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of defined national security objectives," the statement says. It also will establish a two-level "independent redress mechanism" with binding authority, which it said will "direct remedial measures, and enhance rigorous and layered oversight of signals intelligence activities." The efforts, the statement says, places limitations on surveillance. Officials said the framework reflects more than a year of negotiations between U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo and EU Commissioner for Justice Didier Reynders.
There's a software key stored on basically every Android phone, inside a secure element and separated from your own data — separately from Android itself, even. The bits required for that key are provided by the device manufacturer when the phone is made, signed by a root key that's provided by Google. In more practical terms, apps that need to do something sensitive can prove that the bundled secure hardware environment can be trusted, and this is the basis on which a larger chain of love trust can be built, allowing things like biometric data, user data, and secure operations of all kind to be stored or transmitted safely. Previously, Android devices that wanted to enjoy this process needed to have that key securely installed at the factory, but Google is changing from in-factory private key provisioning to in-factory public key extraction with over-the-air certificate provisioning, paired with short-lived certificates. As even the description makes it sound, this new change is a more complicated system, but it fixes a lot of issues in practice.?
The first is to change the perception of security’s role as the “office of NO.” Security programs need to embrace that their role is to ENABLE the business to take RISKS, and not to eliminate risks. For example, if a company needs to set up operations in a high-risk country, with risky cyber laws or operators, the knee jerk reaction of most security teams is to say “no.” In reality, the job of the security team is to enable the company to take that risk by building sound security programs that can identify, detect, and respond to cybersecurity threats. When company leaders see security teams trying to help them achieve their business goals, they are better able to see the value of a strong cybersecurity program. Similarly, cybersecurity teams must understand their company’s business goals and align security initiatives accordingly. Too many security teams try to push their security initiatives as priorities for the business, when, in fact, those initiatives may be business negatives.