0

Fakability is not an actual word. I came up with it to explain what I am looking for - a word that aptly describes something that can be easily faked. For example,

The fakability of this device is so high that we can never be sure if the sample we are holding came from the original source.

you see, there is a technical context here,

Those parameters have high fakability, you must double check their values as a script kiddie can easily simulate them.

  • 1
    OK, so you're limiting spoof to specifically an attack context, whereas I don't. – Jeff Zeitlin Jul 31 '18 at 18:02
  • 1
    I would consider what Stuxnet was doing as 'spoofing'; it was spoofing whatever device normally sent data to the PLCs that Stuxnet attacked. – Jeff Zeitlin Jul 31 '18 at 18:05
  • 1
    However, I think the spelling suggested below is apt with an already-in-use example, so I am just going with fakeable. – Jishan Jul 31 '18 at 18:08
  • 1
    @Jishan: I don't believe that 'spoof' is as narrowly defined as you seem to think. I will accept that it usually is used in reference to spoofing ones identity, generally with falsified TCP/IP packets, however my understanding is that other data can also be spoofed. This doesn't however mean that it's the best word for you. – 3D1T0R Jul 31 '18 at 18:56
  • 1
    @3D1T0R True. My reluctance to use spoof was because I already have a spoof scenario in my paper - so I was strongly looking at a different word. – Jishan Jul 31 '18 at 19:02
0

I would spell it fakeability but both forms exist, even if they are rare. The word seems to be quite commonly used in the computer security field.

For example:

On the Specification of Secure Channels

Recall that non-confidential, non-redirectable, fakeable channels can simulate message redirection by learning messages and faking them ...

Formal Aspects in Security and Trust: 6th International Workshop, FAST 2009

If a channel is non-fakable ...

There also uses relating to crime scene evidence, etc.

  • 1
    Incidentally, my field IS cybersecurity. I guess then my usage will be apt. Thanks for the correct spelling. – Jishan Jul 31 '18 at 18:03
  • Can you provide Marriam Webster or Oxford Dictionary reference supporting your argument? – Ubi hatt Aug 1 '18 at 2:19
  • @Looper No. The word isn’t in the online versions. – user184130 Aug 1 '18 at 6:56
  • @JamesRandom it is just a made up word. – Ubi hatt Aug 1 '18 at 7:15
  • @Looper All words are "made up". Many, as in this case, using the rules of English morphology and phonology. The word is constructed in standard ways from existing morphemes. Its meaning is transparent, based on the bound morpheme suffixes. It is not frequently used enough to appear in some dictionaries. You will find that is true of many words. Both spellings do occur in Wiktionary: en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fakable (but perhaps you think that is a made up website). – user184130 Aug 1 '18 at 7:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.