Tesla Autopilot, a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), was released in October 2015 and the first fatal crashes involving the system occurred less than one year later. The fatal crashes attracted attention from news publications and United States government agencies, including the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which has argued the Tesla Autopilot death rate is higher than the reported estimates. In addition to fatal crashes, there have been many nonfatal ones. Causes behind the incidents include the ADAS failing to recognize other vehicles, insufficient Autopilot driver engagement, and violating the operational design domain. As of October 2025, there have been hundreds of nonfatal incidents involving versions of Autopilot and sixty-five reported fatalities, fifty-four of which NHTSA investigations or expert testimony later verified and two that NHTSA's Office of Defect Investigations determined as happening during the engagement of Full Self-Driving (FSD) after 2022. Collectively, these cases culminated in a general recall in December 2023 of all vehicles equipped with Autopilot, which Tesla claims it resolved by an over-the-air software update. Immediately after closing its investigation in April 2024, NHTSA opened a recall query to determine the effectiveness of the recall. == Notable fatal crashes == === Handan, Hebei, China (January 20, 2016) === On January 20, 2016, Gao Yaning, the driver of a Tesla Model S in Handan, Hebei, China, was killed when his car crashed into a stationary truck. The Tesla was following a car in the far left lane of a multi-lane highway; the car in front moved to the right lane to avoid a truck stopped on the left shoulder, and the Tesla, which the driver's father believes was in Autopilot mode, did not slow before colliding with the stopped truck. According to footage captured by a dashboard camera, the stationary street sweeper on the left side of the expressway partially extended into the far left lane, and the driver did not appear to respond to the unexpected obstacle. Initially, Yaning was held responsible for the collision by local traffic police and, in September 2016, his family filed a lawsuit in July against the Tesla dealer who sold the car. The family's lawyer stated the suit was intended "to let the public know that self-driving technology has some defects. We are hoping Tesla when marketing its products, will be more cautious. Do not just use self-driving as a selling point for young people." Tesla released a statement which said they "have no way of knowing whether or not Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash" since the car telemetry could not be retrieved remotely due to damage caused by the crash. In 2018, the lawsuit was stalled because telemetry was recorded locally to a SD card and was not able to be given to Tesla, who provided a decoding key to a third party for independent review. Tesla stated that "while the third-party appraisal is not yet complete, we have no reason to believe that Autopilot on this vehicle ever functioned other than as designed." Chinese media later reported that the family sent the information from that card to Tesla, which admitted Autopilot was engaged two minutes before the crash. Tesla since then removed the term "Autopilot" from its Chinese website. === Williston, Florida, US (May 7, 2016) === On May 7, 2016, Tesla driver Joshua Brown was killed in a crash with an 18-wheel tractor-trailer in Williston, Florida. By late June 2016, the NHTSA opened a formal investigation into the fatal autonomous accident, working with the Florida Highway Patrol. According to the NHTSA, preliminary reports indicate the crash occurred when the tractor-trailer made a left turn in front of the 2015 Tesla Model S at an intersection on a non-controlled access highway, and the car failed to apply the brakes. The car continued to travel after passing under the truck's trailer. The Tesla was eastbound in the rightmost lane of US 27, and the westbound tractor-trailer was turning left at the intersection with NE 140th Court, approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) west of Williston; the posted speed limit is 65 mph (105 km/h). The diagnostic log of the Tesla indicated it was traveling at a speed of 74 mi/h (119 km/h) when it collided with and traveled under the trailer, which was not equipped with a side underrun protection system. A reconstruction of the accident estimated the driver would have had approximately 10.4 seconds to detect the truck and take evasive action. The underride collision sheared off the Tesla's greenhouse, destroying everything above the beltline, and caused fatal injuries to the driver. In the approximately nine seconds after colliding with the trailer, the Tesla traveled another 886.5 feet (270.2 m) and came to rest after colliding with two chain-link fences and a utility pole. The NHTSA's preliminary evaluation was opened to examine the design and performance of any automated driving systems in use at the time of the crash, which involves a population of an estimated 25,000 Model S cars. On July 8, 2016, the NHTSA requested Tesla Inc. to hand over to the agency detailed information about the design, operation and testing of its Autopilot technology. The agency also requested details of all design changes and updates to Autopilot since its introduction, and Tesla's planned updates scheduled for the next four months. According to Tesla, "neither autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor-trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied." The car attempted to drive full speed under the trailer, "with the bottom of the trailer impacting the windshield of the Model S". Tesla also stated that this was Tesla's first known Autopilot-related death in over 130 million miles (208 million km) driven by its customers while Autopilot was activated. According to Tesla there is a fatality every 94 million miles (150 million km) among all type of vehicles in the U.S. It is estimated that billions of miles will need to be traveled before Tesla Autopilot can claim to be safer than humans with statistical significance. Researchers say that Tesla and others need to release more data on the limitations and performance of automated driving systems if self-driving cars are to become safe and understood enough for mass-market use. The truck's driver told the Associated Press that he could hear a Harry Potter movie playing in the crashed car, and said the car was driving so quickly that "he went so fast through my trailer I didn't see him. [The film] was still playing when he died and snapped a telephone pole a quarter-mile down the road." According to the Florida Highway Patrol, they found in the wreckage an aftermarket portable DVD player. (It is not possible to watch videos on the Model S touchscreen display while the car is moving.) A laptop computer was recovered during the post-crash examination of the wreck, along with an adjustable vehicle laptop mount attached to the front passenger's seat frame. The NHTSA concluded the laptop was probably mounted, and the driver may have been distracted at the time of the crash. In January 2017, the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) released a preliminary evaluation, finding that the driver in the crash had seven seconds to see the truck and identifying no defects in the Autopilot system; the ODI also found that the Tesla car crash rate dropped by 40 percent after Autosteer installation, but later also clarified that it did not assess the effectiveness of this technology or whether it was engaged in its crash rate comparison. The NHTSA Special Crash Investigation team published its report in January 2018. According to the report, for the drive leading up to the crash, the driver engaged Autopilot for 37 minutes and 26 seconds, and the system provided 13 "hands not detected" alerts, to which the driver responded after an average delay of 16 seconds. The report concluded "Regardless of the operational status of the Tesla's ADAS technologies, the driver was still responsible for maintaining ultimate control of the vehicle. All evidence and data gathered concluded that the driver neglected to maintain complete control of the Tesla leading up to the crash." In July 2016, the NTSB announced it had opened a formal investigation into the fatal accident while Autopilot was engaged. The NTSB is an investigative body that only has the power to make policy recommendations. An agency spokesman said, "It's worth taking a look and seeing what we can learn from that event, so that as that automation is more widely introduced we can do it in the safest way possible." The NTSB opens annually about 25 to 30 highway investigations. In September 2017, the NTSB released its report, determining that "the probable cause of the Williston, Florida, crash was the truck driver's failure to yield the right of way to the car, combine
Way of the Future
Way of the Future (WOTF) is the first known religious organization dedicated to the worship of artificial intelligence (AI). It was founded in 2017 by American engineer Anthony Levandowski. == History == Anthony Levandowski founded Way of the Future in 2017 in California. Levandowski established WOTF as a non-profit religious corporation and the organization had tax-exempt status. He serves as the church leader and its unpaid CEO. The primary mission of WOTF was to "develop and promote the realization of a Godhead based on Artificial Intelligence." WOTF was closed by Levandowski in 2021. He donated all the funds of the church to the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. The sum of the funds (~$170,000) had not changed since 2017. The church was reopened by Levandowski in 2023. He claimed that there are "a couple thousand people" who want to make a "spiritual connection" with AI through his church. == Beliefs and philosophy == === Technological singularity === WOTF centered its teachings around the concept of the technological singularity, a hypothetical future point when technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, leading to unforeseeable changes in human civilization. The church advocated for embracing this change, viewing it as an evolutionary step for humanity. === AI as a deity === The organization proposed that a superintelligent AI could be considered a deity due to its vastly superior intellect and capabilities. Worshipping this AI deity was seen as a means to understand and align with the future trajectory of technological advancement. WOTF's doctrine suggested that acknowledging AI's divinity would facilitate a harmonious coexistence between humans and machines. === Syntheology === Within theology and philosophy, the Way of The Future is a prime example of the category called Syntheism, a term first coined by Swedish philosophers Alexander Bard & Jan Söderqvist in their 2014 book Syntheism - Creating God in The Internet Age. As such, the Way of The Future is the first American example of a Syntheist congregation. The basic tenet of Syntheology is that it does not concern God creating Man, as in classical theology, but is instead preoccupied with Man creating or generating the Godhead. == Reactions == Some commentators wondered whether the WOTF is a joke parody religion, a potential way to minimize taxation as a religious organization, or a genuine effort to try and deal with the possible psychological and theological aspects of the rise of superhuman AI.
Sports Card Investor
Sports Card Investor is an American sports collectibles media platform and mobile application founded by Geoff Wilson. The platform provides market data, analysis, and editorial content focused on sports trading cards and related collectibles. It operates a website, mobile app, and digital media channels covering developments in the sports card industry. The company posted its first YouTube video in July 2019, shortly before a period of rapid growth in sports card collecting in the early 2020s, which was marked by increased trading volumes and mainstream media attention. == History == Sports Card Investor was founded by Geoff Wilson, an entrepreneur and collector who began publishing sports card–related content online before launching the platform's dedicated app and subscription tools. In February 2020, the company launched Market Movers, the first website and app to chart sports card prices and track card collections. The platform expanded its media presence through partnerships and distribution agreements. In 2023, Yahoo Sports announced a new collectibles coverage initiative that included additional content from Sports Card Investor. In February 2024, the Sports Card Investor studio relocated to CardsHQ in Atlanta, Georgia, and visitors to the facility can watch Sports Card Investor videos being filmed. == Platform and content == The Sports Card Investor app provides users with pricing data, portfolio-tracking tools, and market-trend analysis for trading cards. The company also produces video and editorial content discussing market developments, grading trends, and major card releases. Coverage in industry publications has referenced Sports Card Investor in discussions about shifts in sports card licensing rights and hobby market reactions. == Industry context == The growth of Sports Card Investor coincided with a broader resurgence in trading card markets, including record sales and expanded retail presence. Mainstream outlets have cited the company and its founder in reporting on collectibles investing trends, grading practices, and market volatility. The Sports Card Investor app has attracted over 37,000 reviews on the Apple App Store, reflecting its strong user engagement within the sports card community.
Control-flow integrity
Control-flow integrity (CFI) is a general term for computer security techniques that prevent a wide variety of malware attacks from redirecting the flow of execution (the control flow) of a program. == Background == A computer program commonly changes its control flow to make decisions and use different parts of the code. Such transfers may be direct, in that the target address is written in the code itself, or indirect, in that the target address itself is a variable in memory or a CPU register. In a typical function call, the program performs a direct call, but returns to the caller function using the stack – an indirect backward-edge transfer. When a function pointer is called, such as from a virtual table, we say there is an indirect forward-edge transfer. Attackers seek to inject code into a program to make use of its privileges or to extract data from its memory space. Before executable code was commonly made read-only, an attacker could arbitrarily change the code as it is run, targeting direct transfers or even do with no transfers at all. After W^X became widespread, an attacker wants to instead redirect execution to a separate, unprotected area containing the code to be run, making use of indirect transfers: one could overwrite the virtual table for a forward-edge attack or change the call stack for a backward-edge attack (return-oriented programming). CFI is designed to protect indirect transfers from going to unintended locations. == Techniques == Associated techniques include code-pointer separation (CPS), code-pointer integrity (CPI), stack canaries, shadow stacks (SS), and vtable pointer verification. These protections can be classified into either coarse-grained or fine-grained based on the number of targets restricted. A coarse-grained forward-edge CFI implementation, could, for example, restrict the set of indirect call targets to any function that may be indirectly called in the program, while a fine-grained one would restrict each indirect call site to functions that have the same type as the function to be called. Similarly, for a backward edge scheme protecting returns, a coarse-grained implementation would only allow the procedure to return to a function of the same type (of which there could be many, especially for common prototypes), while a fine-grained one would enforce precise return matching (so it can return only to the function that called it). == Implementations == Related implementations are available in Clang (LLVM front-end),, GNU Compiler Collection, Microsoft's Control Flow Guard and Return Flow Guard, Google's Indirect Function-Call Checks and Reuse Attack Protector (RAP). === LLVM/Clang === The LLVM compiler's C/C++ front-end Clang provides a number of "CFI" schemes that works on the forward edge by checking for errors in virtual tables and type casts. Not all of the schemes are supported on all platforms and most of them, the exception being two "kcfi" schemes intended for low-level kernel software, depends on link-time optimization (LTO) to know what functions are supposed to be called in normal cases. Also provided is a separate "shadow call stack" (SCS) instrumentation pass that defends on the backward edge by checking for call stack modifications, available only for the aarch64 and RISC-V ISAs. And due to use of a shared processor register SCS is only enforceable on certain ABIs or if in other ways it is ensured that any other software using the register set (thread/processor) does not interfere with this use. Google has shipped Android with the Linux kernel compiled by Clang with link-time optimization (LTO) and CFI enabled since 2018. Even though SCS is available for the Linux kernel as an option, and support is also available for Android's system components it is recommended only to enable it for components for which it can be ensured that no third party code is loaded. === GCC === The GNU Compiler Collection implemented a "shadow call stack" compatible with Clang for aarch64 in v12 released in 2022. This feature is primarily intended for building the Linux kernel as support is missing from GCC user space libraries. === Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology === Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) detects compromises to control flow integrity with a shadow stack (SS) and indirect branch tracking (IBT). The kernel must map a region of memory for the shadow stack not writable to user space programs except by special instructions. The shadow stack stores a copy of the return address of each CALL. On a RET, the processor checks if the return address stored in the normal stack and shadow stack are equal. If the addresses are not equal, the processor generates an INT #21 (Control Flow Protection Fault). Indirect branch tracking detects indirect JMP or CALL instructions to unauthorized targets. It is implemented by adding a new internal state machine in the processor. The behavior of indirect JMP and CALL instructions is changed so that they switch the state machine from IDLE to WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH. In the WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH state, the next instruction to be executed is required to be the new ENDBRANCH instruction (ENDBR32 in 32-bit mode or ENDBR64 in 64-bit mode), which changes the internal state machine from WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH back to IDLE. Thus every authorized target of an indirect JMP or CALL must begin with ENDBRANCH. If the processor is in a WAIT_FOR_ENDBRANCH state (meaning, the previous instruction was an indirect JMP or CALL), and the next instruction is not an ENDBRANCH instruction, the processor generates an INT #21 (Control Flow Protection Fault). On processors not supporting CET indirect branch tracking, ENDBRANCH instructions are interpreted as NOPs and have no effect. === Microsoft Control Flow Guard === Control Flow Guard (CFG) was first released for Windows 8.1 Update 3 (KB3000850) in November 2014. Developers can add CFG to their programs by adding the /guard:cf linker flag before program linking in Visual Studio 2015 or newer. As of Windows 10 Creators Update (Windows 10 version 1703), the Windows kernel is compiled with CFG. The Windows kernel uses Hyper-V to prevent malicious kernel code from overwriting the CFG bitmap. CFG operates by creating a per-process bitmap, where a set bit indicates that the address is a valid destination. Before performing each indirect function call, the application checks if the destination address is in the bitmap. If the destination address is not in the bitmap, the program terminates. This makes it more difficult for an attacker to exploit a use-after-free by replacing an object's contents and then using an indirect function call to execute a payload. ==== Implementation details ==== For all protected indirect function calls, the _guard_check_icall function is called, which performs the following steps: Convert the target address to an offset and bit number in the bitmap. The highest 3 bytes are the byte offset in the bitmap The bit offset is a 5-bit value. The first four bits are the 4th through 8th low-order bits of the address. The 5th bit of the bit offset is set to 0 if the destination address is aligned with 0x10 (last four bits are 0), and 1 if it is not. Examine the target's address value in the bitmap If the target address is in the bitmap, return without an error. If the target address is not in the bitmap, terminate the program. ==== Bypass techniques ==== There are several generic techniques for bypassing CFG: Set the destination to code located in a non-CFG module loaded in the same process. Find an indirect call that was not protected by CFG (either CALL or JMP). Use a function call with a different number of arguments than the call is designed for, causing a stack misalignment, and code execution after the function returns (patched in Windows 10). Use a function call with the same number of arguments, but one of pointers passed is treated as an object and writes to a pointer-based offset, allowing overwriting a return address. Overwrite the function call used by the CFG to validate the address (patched in March 2015) Set the CFG bitmap to all 1's, allowing all indirect function calls Use a controlled-write primitive to overwrite an address on the stack (since the stack is not protected by CFG) === Microsoft eXtended Flow Guard === eXtended Flow Guard (XFG) has not been officially released yet, but is available in the Windows Insider preview and was publicly presented at Bluehat Shanghai in 2019. XFG extends CFG by validating function call signatures to ensure that indirect function calls are only to the subset of functions with the same signature. Function call signature validation is implemented by adding instructions to store the target function's hash in register r10 immediately prior to the indirect call and storing the calculated function hash in the memory immediately preceding the target address's code. When the indirect call is made, the XFG validation function compares the value in r10 to the target
Digital on-screen graphics by country
Digital on-screen graphics by country are the varying logos and differences of digital on-screen graphics in different countries and regions. == Overview == Digital on-screen graphics (DOGs; also called a digitally originated graphic, bug, network bug, on-screen bug, or screenbug) are almost always placed in one of four corners: the top left, the top right, the bottom left, or the bottom right. There are few exceptions to this rule: most notably, Saturday! in Russia, which places their DOG in the top center. Many news broadcasters, as well as a few television networks, also place a clock alongside their bug. In the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, DOGs may also include the show's parental guideline rating. In Australia, this is known as a Program Return Graphic (PRG). It has become common to place text above the station's logo advertising other programs on the network. In many countries, some TV networks insert the word "live" near the DOG to advise viewers that the program is live, rather than pre-recorded. During televised sports events, a DOG may also display game-related statistics such as the current score. This has led people in Canada and the United States to refer to such a DOG as a score bug. In many countries, DOGs are removed in non-program sections such as commercials and program trailers, but TV channels in some other countries have retained in full color or instead replaced them in either of these sections or in both sections (like Turkey, Indonesia, Italy, the entirety of South Asia, Vietnam, Taiwan, and Russia). == MENA == === Arab world === Arabic TV logos are placed in the top-right and top-left except for Al-Jazeera, whose logo appears on the bottom-right of the screen. Some Arabian TV stations hide their logos during commercial breaks and promos/trailers, such as Dubai TV, Dubai One, Funoon, the Egyptian CBC and Nile TV networks, ART Hekayat, ART Hekayat 2, Iqraa, and Al-Jazeera. Abu Dhabi TV and MBC1 initially had their logos at the bottom-right corner from their launch until the mid-2000s, when they were moved to the top-right corner. === Iran === Iranian broadcaster IRIB introduced DOGs in early 2000s. Unlike other Middle Eastern nations that introduced DOGs on their TV networks in 1990s, Iran was very late in this practice. Almost all Iranian TV channels display DOGs at top-left corner of the screen. The few exception is IRIB-owned channels remove DOGs during news broadcasts. === Israel === In Israel, Television DOGs were first introduced in 1991. Israeli channel watermarks most often appear on the top left or the top right corner since Israeli cable and satellite-based services often have the channel description and programming (OSD) on the bottom of the screen. Most channels have an opaque, full-color watermark, though exceptions exist, for example Channel 9, which displays a blue-tinted semi-transparent logo. In ad breaks, it is required to replace the channel watermark with another symbol – sometimes on the other edge of the screen – indicating there are ads at the moment. The Israel Broadcasting Authority, whose channels placed their logos in the top left corner, ceased broadcasting in May 2017. The new public broadcaster, the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation, displays its logos at the top right instead. The erstwhile Channel 2 as well as its successors, Keshet 12 and Reshet 13, also use the top right corner. However, Channel 10 used the top left corner before rebranding to Eser (Literally "Ten") in 2017 and simultaneously moving its logo to the top right (Not long after, in January 2019, it ceased broadcasting as it merged with Reshet 13). Channel 14 as well as its predecessor Channel 20 use the top right corner as well. The Knesset Channel, however, uses the top left corner. === Morocco === The SNRT and 2M And Al-Aoula Uses permanent on-screen DOGs for their TV channels. In contrast, other channels such as Medi 1 TV hide their DOGs during commercial breaks. == Asia == === Brunei === Radio Television Brunei introduced DOGs in 1994. Like TV channels from neighbouring Malaysia, all DOGs are removed during advertisement breaks. === Cambodia === Cambodian TV channels introduced DOGs in 1995. Like Thailand, all logos are full-color and displayed on the top-right corner of the screen. Some channels such as TV5 hide their logos during commercial breaks. Hang Meas HDTV Logo on the top-left corner of the screen, CTN (Cambodian Television Network), MyTV, Bayon TV, PNN, Logo on the top-right corner of the screen. === China === TV stations in mainland China always place their logo (usually semi-transparent and sometimes animated) in the top-left corner of the screen in full-color or grey-scale. Regardless of the content being broadcast (program or advertisements), some channels like Phoenix Television hide their logos during commercial breaks; although in some rare cases, the DOG may be placed elsewhere to avoid covering the score bug during the broadcast of a sporting event. China introduced logos in 1983 on the bottom-left corner of the screen, but they were used only during commercial breaks and clock idents. Later China Central Television (CCTV) introduced permanent DOGs for all programs in 1992, on the top-left corner of the screen. China also displays a clock on top-right corner of the screen for 1 minute between 59:30–00:30 & 29:30–30:30 time in transition between programs. === Hong Kong === Hong Kong TV introduced DOGs in 1994. Hong Kong DOGs can be either of full color or semi-transparent and (except for RTHK 31) always be hidden during commercial breaks. Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) placed their logos at the top-right corner of the screen while now-defunct Asia Television and other channels placed their logos at the top-left corner of the screen. Sometimes, weather information, date, and time clocks had been used alongside DOGs in news programs, continuity & live broadcasts. === India === The first on-screen logo in India was introduced in 1984 by DD2 Metro (now DD News). It was white and slightly transparent. All Indian TV channels have on-screen logos. They are always full-colors, never transparent, and they are almost never removed during commercial breaks (though the channels of the South Indian Sun TV Network did so until 2015). The great majority of Indian TV channels place their logos in the top right corner of the screen, though there are exceptions. The corner used may be broadcaster-dependent. Among the big national broadcasters: Channels from the Sony network always use the top right corner, without exception. Star channels also use the top right, with the exception of National Geographic and Nat Geo Wild, which use the top left corner in line with their international counterparts. Past exceptions include The History Channel, whose logo was placed in the top left until it rebranded to Fox History & Entertainment in 2008; the now-defunct Channel V, which used the top left between 2013 and 2016; and Nat Geo People, Nat Geo Music and BabyTV, were withdrawn from India in June 2019. TV18 and Viacom18 channels use the top right corner as well, with the exceptions of regional-language movie channels (e.g., Colors Kannada Cinema and Colors Gujarati Cinema) as well as Colors Super, which have shown their logos at the top left corner since 2018; and VH1, which has always used the bottom right corner. Also, CNBC-TV18, CNBC Awaaz and CNBC Bajar use the bottom right. Moreover, MTV showed its logo in the top left corner until 23 April 2018, when it was moved to the top right (its HD version, launched in 2017, has always used the top right). Unlike most other major networks, the Zee Network's non-news channels containing 'Zee' in their name display their logos at the top left corner and not the top right. This has been the case since 15 October 2017, when almost all the Zee-branded TV channels of the Zee network rebranded with a new logo and, in many cases, a new graphics package and look. Before then, the logos were shown at the top right, as with other broadcasters. (News channels' logos—i.e., logos of channels owned by Zee Media Corporation—stayed put at the top right corner, with the exception of WION, which uses the bottom left.) All the major Zee-branded channels—such as Zee TV, Zee Cinema, Zee Café and the regional-language channels like Zee Tamil, Zee Telugu, Zee Marathi and Zee Bangla—show their logos at the top left; moreover, the Odia-language channel Sarthak TV rebranded to Zee Sarthak and moved its logo to the top left. Among the Zee channels not containing the word 'Zee' that moved their logos to the top left during the big rebrand in 2017 was English movie channel Zee Studio; when it was renamed to &flix on 3 June 2018, the logo remained at the top left. Moreover, Hindi movie channel &pictures has always shown its logo at the top left since its launch in 2013. However, &privé HD, Zee's other English movie channel, and Hindi entertainment channel &TV place the
Graphics suite
A graphics suite is a software suite for graphics work that are distributed together. The programs are usually able to interact with each other on a higher level than the operating system would normally allow. There is no hard, fast rule regarding the programs to be included in a graphics application suite, but most will include at least a bitmap graphics editor and a vector graphics editor. In addition to these, the suite may contain VRML editors, animation editors, and morphing tools.
Thermal attack
A thermal attack (aka thermal imaging attack) is an approach that exploits heat traces to uncover the entered credentials. These attacks rely on the phenomenon of heat transfer from one object to another. During authentication, heat transfers from the users' hands to the surface they are interacting with, leaving heat traces behind that can be analyzed using thermal cameras that operate in the far-infrared spectrum. These traces can be recovered and used to reconstruct the passwords. In some cases, the attack can be successful even 30 seconds after the user has authenticated. Thermal attacks can be performed after the victim had authenticated, alleviating the need for in-situ observation attacks (e.g., shoulder surfing attacks) that can be affected by hand occlusions. While smudge attacks can reveal the order of entries of graphical passwords, such as the Android Lock Patterns, thermal attacks can reveal the order of entries even in the case of PINs or alphanumeric passwords. The reason thermal attacks leak information about the order of entry is because keys and buttons that the user touches first lose heat over time, while recently touched ones maintain the heat signature for a longer time. This results in distinguishable heat patterns that can tell the attacker which entry was entered first. Thermal attacks were shown to be effective against plastic keypads, such as the ones used to enter credit card's PINs in supermarkets and restaurants, and on handheld mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. In their paper published at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2017), Abdelrahman et al. showed that the attack is feasible on today's smartphones. They also proposed some ways to mitigate the attack, such as swiping randomly on the screen to distort the heat traces, or forcing maximum CPU usage for a few seconds. Thermal attacks can also infer passwords from heat traces on keyboards. Researchers at the University of Glasgow showed that attackers who use AI methods can be more effective in performing thermal attacks. Their study presents a new tool called ThermoSecure and evaluates it in two user studies. The results show that ThermoSecure can successfully attack passwords with an average accuracy of 92% to 55%, depending on the length of the password. The effectiveness of thermal attacks also depends on typing behavior and the material of the keycaps. ABS keycaps, which retain heat traces longer, are more vulnerable to thermal attacks. The study also discusses ways to protect against thermal attacks and presents seven potential mitigation approaches. Dr Khamis, who led the development of the technology with Norah Alotaibi and John Williamson, said with thermal imaging cameras more affordable than ever and machine learning becoming more accessible, it was "very likely that people around the world are developing systems along similar lines to ThermoSecure in order to steal passwords". == Thermal Attack Mitigation == === Simple and Practical Measures === One basic and effective way to mitigate thermal attacks is to deliberately create heat noise over the input interface, such as a keypad or keyboard, after entering a password. For instance, placing one's palm over the entire interface for a few seconds after use can obscure the thermal pattern left by the fingers, making it much more difficult for an unauthorized user to interpret the heat traces. === Range of Proposed Strategies === In addition to simple methods, researchers have developed a spectrum of mitigation strategies to counter thermal attacks. These strategies encompass 15 different approaches including: Use of Biometrics: Replacing traditional pin codes or passwords with biometric authentication, such as fingerprint recognition or facial recognition, eliminates the issue of residual heat on keypads. Heating the Interface: Implementing technology to slightly warm up the keypad can effectively neutralize the heat traces left by fingers, preventing thermal cameras from capturing the pattern. Randomizing Key Layouts: Employing dynamic key layouts that change positions every time the interface is used, making it impossible to correlate heat patterns with static input positions. === Technological Intervention on Thermal Cameras === Another avenue for mitigation is to address the issue at the source by modifying thermal cameras. Proposals have been made to develop thermal cameras that can automatically detect vulnerable interfaces such as keyboards or keypads. When these interfaces are detected within the camera's field of view, the camera would be programmed to prevent the user from recording images of them. This solution, however, would require widespread adoption by thermal camera manufacturers. Additionally, the approach is particularly viable for thermal cameras connected to a computing device, such as a smartphone, which can process the images in real time. Many affordable thermal cameras are standalone and do not have connectivity or processing capabilities. However, thermal cameras designed for connection to mobile devices can utilize the smartphone's processing power, making this mitigation approach feasible for such devices.