IceCube Cybersecurity Improvement Plan

This document is a product of the Center for Trustworthy Scientific Cyberinfrastructure (CTSC). CTSC is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number OCI-1234408. For more information about the Center for Trustworthy Scientific Cyberinfrastructure please visit: http://trustedci.org/. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Report of the 2014 NSF Cybersecurity Summit for Large Facilities and Cyberinfrastructure

This event was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 1234408. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed at the event or in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Report of the 2013 NSF Cybersecurity Summit for Cyberinfrastructure and Large Facilities: Designing Cybersecurity Programs in Support of Science

This 3-day summit focused on challenges of supporting those who secure scientific cyberinfrastructure. Tutorials covered identity management, network security and monitoring cybersecurity planning, and secure software development. Working group efforts continue in the Trusted CI Forum (trustedci.groupside.com). Future summits were discussed.This event was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 1234408. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed at the event or in this report are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the National Science Foundation or any other organization

Report of the 2015 NSF Cybersecurity Summit for Large Facilities and Cyberinfrastructure

This event was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 1234408. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed at the event or in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Access Control Policy

National Science Foundation (Award# 1920430

The Report of the 2019 NSF Cybersecurity Summit for Large Facilities and Cyberinfrastructure

The Report of the 2019 NSF Cybersecurity Summit for Large Facilities and CyberinfrastructureNSF #1547272Ope

2011 Report of NSF Workshop Series on Scientific Software Security Innovation Institute

Over the period of 2010-2011, a series of two workshops were held in response to NSF Dear Colleague Letter NSF 10-050 calling for exploratory workshops to consider requirements for Scientific Software Innovation Institutes (S2I2s). The specific topic of the workshop series was the potential benefits of a security-focused software institute that would serve the entire NSF research and development community. The first workshop was held on August 6th, 2010 in Arlington, VA and represented an initial exploration of the topic. The second workshop was held on October 26th, 2011 in Chicago, IL and its goals were to 1) Extend our understanding of relevant needs of MREFC and large NSF Projects, 2) refine outcome from first workshop with broader community input, and 3) vet concepts for a trusted cyberinfrastructure institute. Towards those goals, the participants other 2011workshop included greater representation from MREFC and large NSF projects, and, for the most part, did not overlap with the participants from the 2010 workshop. A highlight of the second workshop was, at the invitation of the organizers, a presentation by Scott Koranda of the LIGO project on the history of LIGO’s identity management activities and how those could have benefited from a security institute. A key analysis he presented is that, by his estimation, LIGO could have saved 2 senior FTE-years of effort by following suitable expert guidance had it existed. The overarching finding from the workshops is that security is a critical crosscutting issue for the NSF software infrastructure and recommended a security focused activity to address this issue broadly, for example a security software institute (S2I2) under the SI2 program. Additionally, the 2010 workshop participants agreed to 15 key additional findings, which the 2011 workshop confirmed, with some refinement as discussed in this report.NSF Grant # 1043843Ope

The design, construction, and commissioning of the KATRIN experiment

The KArlsruhe TRItium Neutrino (KATRIN) experiment, which aims to make a direct and model-independent determination of the absolute neutrino mass scale, is a complex experiment with many components. More than 15 years ago, we published a technical design report (TDR) [1] to describe the hardware design and requirements to achieve our sensitivity goal of 0.2 eV at 90% C.L. on the neutrino mass. Since then there has been considerable progress, culminating in the publication of first neutrino mass results with the entire beamline operating [2]. In this paper, we document the current state of all completed beamline components (as of the first neutrino mass measurement campaign), demonstrate our ability to reliably and stably control them over long times, and present details on their respective commissioning campaigns

Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research

No abstract available

Improved Upper Limit on the Neutrino Mass from a Direct Kinematic Method by KATRIN

We report on the neutrino mass measurement result from the first four-week science run of the Karlsruhe Tritium Neutrino experiment KATRIN in spring 2019. Beta-decay electrons from a high-purity gaseous molecular tritium source are energy analyzed by a high-resolution MAC-E filter. A fit of the integrated electron spectrum over a narrow interval around the kinematic end point at 18.57 keV gives an effective neutrino mass square value of $(−1.0^{+0.9}_{−1.1}) eV^2$. From this, we derive an upper limit of 1.1 eV (90% confidence level) on the absolute mass scale of neutrinos. This value coincides with the KATRIN sensitivity. It improves upon previous mass limits from kinematic measurements by almost a factor of 2 and provides model-independent input to cosmological studies of structure formation