NIST Finalizes Trio of Post-Quantum Encryption Standards "NIST has formally accepted three algorithms for post-quantum cryptography," writes ancient Slashdot reader jd. "Two more backup algorithms are being worked on. The idea is to have backup algorithms using very different maths, just in case a flaw in the original approach is discovered later." The Register reports: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) today released the long-awaited post-quantum encryption standards, designed to protect electronic information long into the future -- when quantum computers are expected to break existing cryptographic algorithms. One -- ML-KEM (PDF) (based on CRYSTALS-Kyber) -- is intended for general encryption, which protects data as it moves across public networks. The other two -- ML-DSA (PDF) (originally known as CRYSTALS-Dilithium) and SLH-DSA (PDF) (initially submitted as Sphincs+) -- secure digital signatures, which are used to authenticate online identity. A fourth algorithm -- FN-DSA (PDF) (originally called FALCON) -- is slated for finalization later this year and is also designed for digital signatures. NIST continued to evaluate two other sets of algorithms that could potentially serve as backup standards in the future. One of the sets includes three algorithms designed for general encryption -- but the technology is based on a different type of math problem than the ML-KEM general-purpose algorithm in today's finalized standards. NIST plans to select one or two of these algorithms by the end of 2024. Despite the new ones on the horizon, NIST mathematician Dustin Moody encouraged system administrators to start transitioning to the new standards ASAP, because full integration takes some time. "There is no need to wait for future standards," Moody advised in a statement. "Go ahead and start using these three. We need to be prepared in case of an attack that defeats the algorithms in these three standards, and we will continue working on backup plans to keep our data safe. But for most applications, these new standards are the main event." From the NIST: This notice announces the Secretary of Commerce's approval of three Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS): - FIPS 203, Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism Standard - FIPS 204, Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard - FIPS 205, Stateless Hash-Based Digital Signature Standard These standards specify key establishment and digital signature schemes that are designed to resist future attacks by quantum computers, which threaten the security of current standards. The three algorithms specified in these standards are each derived from different submissions in the NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization Project. <a href="http://twitter.com/home?status=NIST+Finalizes+Trio+of+Post-Quantum+Encryption+Standards%3A+https%3A%2F%2Fit.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2150250%2F%3Futm_source%3Dtwitter%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/twitter_icon_large.png"></a> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fit.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2150250%2Fnist-finalizes-trio-of-post-quantum-encryption-standards%3Futm_source%3Dslashdot%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/facebook_icon_large.png"></a> at Slashdot.
FTC Finalizes Rule Banning Fake Reviews, Including Those Made With AI TechCrunch's Lauren Forristal reports: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced on Wednesday a final rule that will tackle several types of fake reviews and prohibit marketers from using deceptive practices, such as AI-generated reviews, censoring honest negative reviews and compensating third parties for positive reviews. The decision was the result of a 5-to-0 vote. The new rule will start being enforced 60 days after it's published in the official government publication called Federal Register. [...] According to the final rule, the maximum civil penalty for fake reviews is $51,744 per violation. However, the courts could impose lower penalties depending on the specific case. "Ultimately, courts will also decide how to calculate the number of violations in a given case," the Commission wrote. [...] The FTC initially proposed the rule on June 30, 2023, following an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking issued in November 2022. You can read the finalized rule here (PDF), but we also included a summary of it below: - No fake or disingenuous reviews. This includes AI-generated reviews and reviews from anyone who doesn't have experience with the actual product. - Businesses can't sell or buy reviews, whether negative or positive. - Company insiders writing reviews need to clearly disclose their connection to the business. Officers or managers are prohibited from giving testimonials and can't ask employees to solicit reviews from relatives. - Company-controlled review websites that claim to be independent aren't allowed. - No using legal threats, physical threats or intimidation to forcefully delete or prevent negative reviews. Businesses also can't misrepresent that the review portion of their website comprises all or most of the reviews when it's suppressing the negative ones. - No selling or buying fake engagement like social media followers, likes or views obtained through bots or hacked accounts. <a href="http://twitter.com/home?status=FTC+Finalizes+Rule+Banning+Fake+Reviews%2C+Including+Those+Made+With+AI%3A+https%3A%2F%2Fyro.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2121242%2F%3Futm_source%3Dtwitter%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/twitter_icon_large.png"></a> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fyro.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2121242%2Fftc-finalizes-rule-banning-fake-reviews-including-those-made-with-ai%3Futm_source%3Dslashdot%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/facebook_icon_large.png"></a> at Slashdot.
'Gemini Is Replacing Google Assistant On Pixel Phones, and It's a Trainwreck' An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fast Company's Jared Newman: With its new Pixel 9 phones, Google Assistant is getting a demotion. In its place, Google's will ship Gemini as the default voice assistant on its flagship phones. Gemini uses large language models to interpret questions and generate answers, which means it can respond in a more conversational way. But while Google is eager to showcase Gemini as an answer to OpenAI's ChatGPT, tossing out Assistant is a mistake. Too often, Gemini fails at performing basic tasks, and it's going to cause lots of frustration for folks who depend on their phone's voice control features. Although Google says Gemini can now handle many of the same instructions as Assistant, that hasn't been my experience at all. As evidence, I submit a list of useful Google Assistant actions that either aren't possible or don't work properly with Gemini. Here is a summary of the challenges Gemini faces, as documented by Newman: 1. Local results are worse: Gemini provides less useful information for local business queries compared to Google Assistant, lacking context and formatting. 2. Gemini can't take notes: Unlike Google Assistant, Gemini cannot take voice notes or save them in an app like Google Keep. 3. No-can-do on to-do lists: Gemini does not support adding items to to-do lists, a feature that Google Assistant handles efficiently. 4. Weather doesn't work right: Gemini struggles with weather forecasts, often giving incorrect locations, unlike Google Assistant which works reliably. 5. Turn-by-turn directions don't load: Gemini fails to provide direct turn-by-turn navigation, only offering a preview, whereas Google Assistant launches navigation immediately. 6. Music and podcast requests are YouTube-only: Gemini only supports YouTube Music, unlike Google Assistant which supports multiple streaming services. 7. Video (in)capabilities: Gemini cannot directly access streaming apps for movies or shows, only suggesting content with no direct links. 8. No photo search: Gemini cannot search for photos in Google Photos, a task that Google Assistant can easily handle. 9. Bye-bye to a useful news feature: Gemini fails to play or provide recent news effectively, unlike Google Assistant's useful daily news briefing feature. 10. No Routines: Gemini does not support the automation of multiple actions through Routines, a feature present in Google Assistant. 11. So much for Shortcuts: Gemini lacks the Shortcuts feature available in Google Assistant, offering no replacement for quick actions in third-party apps. 12. A slower experience: Responses from Gemini are slower by a second or two compared to Google Assistant when answering queries. <a href="http://twitter.com/home?status='Gemini+Is+Replacing+Google+Assistant+On+Pixel+Phones%2C+and+It's+a+Trainwreck'%3A+https%3A%2F%2Ftech.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2110234%2F%3Futm_source%3Dtwitter%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/twitter_icon_large.png"></a> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftech.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F24%2F08%2F14%2F2110234%2Fgemini-is-replacing-google-assistant-on-pixel-phones-and-its-a-trainwreck%3Futm_source%3Dslashdot%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook" rel="nofollow"><img src="https://a.fsdn.com/sd/facebook_icon_large.png"></a> at Slashdot.