J
Jon Howell
Researcher at Microsoft
Publications - 61
Citations - 5654
Jon Howell is an academic researcher from Microsoft. The author has contributed to research in topics: Web application & Web service. The author has an hindex of 29, co-authored 61 publications receiving 5151 citations. Previous affiliations of Jon Howell include Google & PARC.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Farsite: federated, available, and reliable storage for an incompletely trusted environment
Atul Adya,William J. Bolosky,Miguel Castro,Cermak Gerald F,Ronnie Chaiken,John R. Douceur,Jon Howell,Jacob R. Lorch,Marvin M. Theimer,Roger Wattenhofer +9 more
TL;DR: The design of Farsite is reported on and the lessons learned by implementing much of that design are reported, including how to locally caching file data, lazily propagating file updates, and varying the duration and granularity of content leases.
Proceedings ArticleDOI
Pinocchio: Nearly Practical Verifiable Computation
TL;DR: This work introduces Pinocchio, a built system for efficiently verifying general computations while relying only on cryptographic assumptions, and is the first general-purpose system to demonstrate verification cheaper than native execution (for some apps).
Proceedings Article
Asirra: a CAPTCHA that exploits interest-aligned manual image categorization.
TL;DR: A CAPTCHA that asks users to identify cats out of a set of 12 photographs of both cats and dogs, and two novel algorithms for amplifying the skill gap between humans and computers that can be used on many existing CAPTCHAs are described.
Posted Content
Pinocchio: Nearly Practical Verifiable Computation.
TL;DR: Pinocchio as discussed by the authors is a built system for efficiently verifying general computations while relying only on cryptographic assumptions, where the client creates a public evaluation key to describe her computation; this setup is proportional to evaluating the computation once.
Proceedings Article
Cooperative Task Management Without Manual Stack Management
TL;DR: This paper identifies the source of confusion about the two programming styles as a conflation of two concepts: task management and stack management, and shows how one can get the best of both worlds: reason more simply about concurrency in the way “event-driven” advocates recommend, while preserving the readability and maintainability of code associated with “multithreaded” programming.