The third domain we call raw and is denoted as R. The third domain is special because primitives in this domain are represented by a pair or two-tuple of values namely text code, raw binary or code, raw for short.

The text code element of the R domain pair is a string of one or more text characters that provides the type and size information for the encoded primitive when in the T domain. The raw binary element is composed of bytes. The actual use of cryptographic primitives happens in the R domain using the raw binary element of the code, raw pair.

Cryptographic primitive values are usually represented as strings of bytes that represent very large integers. Cryptographic libraries typically assume that the inputs and outputs of their functions will be such strings of bytes. The raw binary element of the R domain pair is such a string of bytes.

The CESR protocol, however, is not limited to merely encoding cryptographic primitives but any primary data type numbers, text, datetimes, lists, maps may be encoded in a composable way. A given primitive in the T domain is denoted with t. A member of an indexed set of primitives in the T domain is denoted with t[k]. Likewise, a given primitive in the B domain is denoted with b.

A member of an indexed set of primitives in the B domain is denoted with b[k]. Similarly, a given primitive in the R domain is denoted with r. A member of an indexed set of primitives in the R domain is denoted with r[k]. Although, the composability property mentioned in the previous section only applies to conversions back and forth between the T , and B , domains, conversions between the R , and T domains as well as conversions between the R and B domains are also defined and supported by the protocol as described in detail in this section.

As a result, there is a total of six transformations, one in each direction between the three domains. Let T B denote the abstract transformation function from the B domain to the T domain. This is the dual of B T below. Let B T denote the abstract transformation function from the T domain to the B domain. This is the dual of T B above. Let T R denote the abstract transformation function from the R domain to the T domain. This is the dual of R T below. Let R T denote the abstract transformation function from the T domain to the R domain.

This is the dual of T R above. Let B R denote the abstract transformation function from the R domain to the B domain. This is the dual of R B below. Let R B denote the abstract transformation function from the B domain to the R domain. This is the dual of B R above.

Given these transformations, we can complete a circuit of transformations that starts in any of the three domains and then crosses over the other two domains in either direction. For example, starting in the R domain we can traverse a circuit that crosses into the T and B domains and then crosses back into the R domain as follows: ¶.

Likewise starting in the R domain we can traverse a circuit that crosses into the B and T domains and then crosses back into the R domain as follows: ¶. Concatenation is associative and may be applied to any two primitives or any two groups or sets of concatenated primitives. For example: ¶. If we let cat x[k] denote the concatenation of all elements of a set of indexed primitives x[k] where each element is indexed by a unique value of k.

Given the indexed representation, we can express the transformation between domains of a concatenated set of primitives as follows: ¶. Let T cat b[k] denote the concrete transformation of a given concatenated set of primitives, cat b[k] from the B domain to the T domain.

Let B cat t[k] denote the concrete transformation of a given concatenated set of primitives, cat t[k] from the T domain to the B domain. The concatentation composability property between T and B is expressed as follows: ¶. Basically, composability over concatenation means that the transformation of a set as a whole of concatenated primitives is equal to the concatenation of the set of individually transformed primitives.

For example, suppose we have two primitives in the text domain, namely, t[0] and t[1] that each transforms, respectively, to primitives in the binary domain, namely, b[0] and b[1]. The transformation duals, B T and T B , are composable if and only if, ¶. The composability property defined above allows us to create arbitrary compositions of primitives via concatenation in either the T or B domain and then convert the composition en masse to the other domain and then de-concatenate the result without loss.

The self-framing property of the primitives enables de-concatenation. The composability property is an essential building block for streaming in either domain. The text domain representation of a stream enables better usability readability and the binary domain representation of a stream enables better compactness. In addition, pipelined hierarchical composition codes, allow efficient conversion or off-loading for concurrent processing of composed concatenated groups of primitives in a stream without having to individually parse each primitive before off-loading.

Text, T , domain representations in CESR use only the characters from the URL and filename safe variant of the IETF RFC Base64 standard [ RFC ]. Unless otherwise indicated all references to Base64 [ RFC ] in this document imply the URL and filename safe variant. Notable is the fact that, Base64 [ RFC ] by itself does not satisfy the composability property and must employ pad characters to ensure one-way convertability between binary and text.

In CESR, however, both T and B domain representations include a prepended framing code prefix that is structured in such a way as to ensure composability. Suppose for example we wish to use Base64 characters in the text domain and binary bytes in the binary domain.

For the sake of example, we will call these respectively, naive text and naive binary encodings and domains. Recall that a byte encodes 8 bits of information and a Base64 character encodes 6 bits of information.

Furthermore suppose that we have three primitives denoted a , b , and c in the naive binary domain with lengths of 1, 2, and 3 bytes respectively. In the following diagrams, we denote each byte in a naive binary primitive with zero-based most significant bit first indices. For example, a1 is bit one from a , a0 is bit zero, and A0 for byte zero, A1 for byte 1, etc.

The byte and bit-level diagrams for a is shown below where we use A to denote its bytes: ¶. And finally for c below: ¶. When doing a naive Base64 conversion of a naive binary primitive, one Base64 character represents only six bits from a given byte.

In the following diagrams, each character of a Base64 conversion is denoted using zero-based indices, most significant character first. Therefore encoding a in Base64 requires at least two Base64 characters because the zeroth character only captures the six bits from the first byte and another character is needed to capture the other two bits.

The convention in Base64 uses a Base64 character where the non-coding bits are zeros. This is diagrammed as follows: ¶. where aX represents a bit from A0 and zX represents a zeroed pad bit, and TX represents a non-pad character from the converted Base64 text representing one hextet of information from the converted binary string. Naive Base64 encoding always pads each individual conversion of a string of bytes to an even multiple of four characters.

This provides a property that is not true composability but does ensure that multiple distinct concatenated conversions from binary to Base64 text are separable. It may be described as a sort of one-way composability.

where aX represents a bit from a , AX represents a byte from a , zX represents a zeroed pad bit, PX represents a trailing pad character, and TX represents a non-pad character from the converted Base64 text representing one hextet of information from the converted binary string. We see that Base64 conversion effectively left shifts a by four bits plus two pad characters.

In other words, the Base64 conversion of a is no longer right aligned with respect to the trailing Base64 character. Likewise b requires at least three Base64 characters to capture all of its sixteen bits of information as follows: ¶.

where bX represents a bit from b , BX represents a byte from b , zX represents a zeroed pad bit, and TX represents a non-pad character from the converted Base64 text representing one hextet of information from the converted binary string. Alignment on a 4 character bit boundary requires one pad character this becomes: ¶. where bX represents a bit from b , BX represents a byte from b , zX represents a zeroed pad bit, PX represents a trailing pad character, and TX represents a non-pad character from the converted Base64 text representing one hextet of information from the converted binary string.

We see that Base64 conversion effectively left shifts b by four bits plus one pad character. In other words, the Base64 conversion of b is no longer right aligned with respect to the trailing Base64 character.

Finally, c requires exactly four Base64 characters to capture all of its twenty-four bits of information. There are no pad characters required. where cX represents a bit from c , CX represents a byte from c , and TX represents a non-pad character from the converted Base64 text representing one hextet of information from the converted binary string.

There are no bit shifts because there are no pad bits nor pad characters needed, and the resulting Base64 conversion is right aligned with respect to the trailing Base64 character. We have the following: ¶. We see that the least significant two bits of A0 are encoded into the same character, T2 as the four most significant four bits of B1.

Therefore, standard naive binary to Base64 conversion does not satisfy the composability constraint. Suppose instead we start in the text domain with primitives u and v of lengths 1 and 3 characters respectively. We see that all six bits of information in U0 is included in B2 along with the least significant two bits of information in V2.

Therefore, standard naive Base64 to binary conversion does not satisfy the composability constraint. Indeed, the composability property is only satisfied if each primitive in the T domain is an integer multiple of four Base64 characters 24 bits and each primitive in the B domain is an integer multiple of three bytes 24 bits. Each of either four Base64 text characters or three binary bytes captures twenty-four bits of information.

Twenty-four is the least common multiple of six and eight. Therefore in order to cleanly capture integer multiples of twenty-four bits of information, primitive lengths MUST be integer multiples of either four Base64 text characters or three binary bytes in their respective domains.

Given the constraint of alignment on bit boundaries in either text or binary domains is satisfied, the conversion of concatenated primitives in one domain never results in the same byte or character in the converted domain sharing bits from two adjacent primitives. This constraint of bit alignment, therefore, satisfies the composability property. To elaborate, when converting streams made up of concatenated primitives back and forth between the T and B domains, the converted results will not align on byte or character boundaries at the end of each primitive unless the primitives themselves are integer multiples of twenty-four bits of information.

In other words, all primitives must be aligned on twenty-four-bit boundaries to satisfy the composability property. This means that the length of any primitive in the B domain MUST be an integer multiple of three binary bytes with a minimum length of three binary bytes. Likewise, this means that the length of any primitive in the T domain MUST be an integer multiple of 4 Base64 characters with a minimum length of four Base64 characters.

There are many coding schemes that could satisfy the composability constraint of alignment on bit boundaries. The main reason for using a T domain-centric encoding is higher usability, readability, or human friendliness. Indeed a primary design goal of CESR is to select an encoding approach that provides high usability, readability, or human friendliness in the T domain. This type of usability goal is simply not realizable in the B domain.

The B domain's purpose is merely to provide convenient compactness at scale. We believe usability in the T domain is maximized when the type portion of the prepended framing code is stable or invariant. Stable type coding makes it much easier to recognize primitives of a given type when debugging source, reading messages, or documents in the T domain that include encoded primitives.

This is true even when those primitives have different lengths or values. For primitive types that have fixed lengths, i. all primitives of that type have the same length, stable type coding aids not only visual type but visual size recognition. The usability of stable type coding is maximized when the type portion appears first in the framing code.

Stability also requires that for a given type, the type coding portion must consume a fixed integer number of characters in the T domain. To clarify, as used here, stable type coding in the T domain never shares information bits with either length or value coding in any given framing code character and appears first in the framing code. Stable type coding in the T domain translates to stable type coding in the B domain except that the type coding portion of the framing code may not respect byte boundaries.

This is an acceptable tradeoff because binary-domain parsing tools easily accommodate bit fields and bit shifts while text-domain parsing tools do not. Generally, text-domain parsing tools only process whole characters. This is another reason to impose a stability constraint on the T domain type coding instead of the B domain. A secondary usability constraint is recognizable or readable stable value coding in the text, T , domain.

Not all primitives benefit from stable value coding. Any representation of a value that is a long random string of characters is essentially unreadable or recognizable versus some other representation. Bit shifts of the value, as long as they are static do not change the readability.

This is not true however of values that are small numbers. Base64 encodings of small numbers are readable. for example, the numerical sequence of decimal numbers, 0, 1, 2 , is recognizable as the sequence of Base64 characters, A, B, C. Thus, all else equal, readable stable value encodings also contribute to usability, at least in some cases. There are two ways to provide the required alignment on bit boundaries to satisfy the composability property. This is what naive Base64 encoding does.

The other way is to pre-pad leading bytes of zeros to the raw binary value before conversion to Base64 to ensure the total size of the raw binary value with pre-pad bytes is an integer multiple of 3 bytes.

This ensures that the size in characters of the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded raw binary is an integer multiple of 4 characters. Given the second way, there is one of two options that depend on the specific code. In the first option, an appropriate number of the text characters that result from the conversion of a porting of the leading pre-pad zero bytes are replaced with the appropriate number of code characters.

In the second option, the code characters are pre-pended to the conversion with leading zeros intact. In the second option, the length of the pre-pended type code MUST also, thereby, be an integer multiple of 4 characters.

In either option, the total length of the T domain primitive with code is an integer multiple of 4 characters.

The first way may be more compact in some cases than the second. The second way may be easier to compute in some cases. The most significant advantage of the second way is that the value portion of is stable and more readable both in the text, T , domain and in the, B , binary domain because the value portion is not shifted by the Base64 conversion as it is with the first way.

In order to avoid confusion with the use of the term pad character , when pre-padding with bytes that are not replaced later, we use the term lead bytes. The term pad may be confusing not merely because both ways use a type of padding but it is also true that the number of pad characters when padding post-conversion equals the number of lead bytes when padding pre-conversion.

Suppose for example the raw binary value is 32 bytes in length. The next higher integer multiple of 3 is 33 bytes. Thus 1 additional leading pad byte is needed to make the size length in byte of raw binary an integer multiple of 3. The 1 lead byte makes that combination a total of 33 bytes in length. The resultant Base64 converted value will be 44 characters in length, which is an integer multiple of 4 characters. In contrast, recall that when we convert a byte raw binary value to Base64 the converted value will have 1 trailing pad character.

In both cases, the resultant length in Base64 is 44 characters. Similarly, a byte raw binary value needs 2 lead bytes to make the combination 66 bytes in length where 66 is the next integer multiple of 3 greater than When converted the result is 88 characters in length.

The number of pad characters added on the result of the Base64 conversion of a byte raw binary is also 2. In summary, there are two possibilities for CESR's coding scheme to ensure a composable bit alignment.

The first is to add trailing pad characters post-conversion. The second is to add leading pad bytes pre-conversion. Because of the greater readability of the value portion of both the fully qualified text, T , or fully qualified binary, B , domain representations, the second approach was chosen for CESR.

The design goals for CESR framing codes include minimizing the framing code size for the most frequently used most popular codes while also supporting a sufficiently comprehensive set of codes for all foreseeable current and future applications. This requires a high degree of both flexibility and extensibility. We believe this is best achieved with multiple code tables each with a different coding scheme that is optimized for a different set of features instead of a single one-size-fits-all scheme.

A specification that supports multiple coding schemes may appear on the surface to be much more complex to implement but careful design of the coding schemes can reduce implementation complexity by using a relatively simple single integrated parse and conversion table.

Parsing in any given domain given stable type codes may then be implemented with a single function that simply reads the appropriate type selector in the table to know how to parse and convert the rest of the primitive.

Recall from above, that the R domain representation is a pair text code, raw binary. The text code is stable and begins with one or more Base64 characters that provide the primitive type and may also include one or more additional characters that provide the length. The actual usable cryptographic material is provided by the raw binary element. The corresponding T domain representation of this pair is created by first prepending leading pad bytes of zeros to the raw binary element.

This result is then converted to Base Depending on the code, either the frontmost characters that result from the Base64 conversion of leading pad bytes of zeros are replaced with the text code element of appropriate size in characters, or an appropriately sized text code element is prepended to the conversion without replacing any characters.

Recall, that when the length of a given naive binary string is not an integer multiple of three bytes, standard Base64 conversion software appends one or two pad characters to the resultant Base64 conversion. With standard Base64 conversion that employs pad characters, the text domain representation that results from the individual conversion of a set of binary strings when concatenated in the text domain after conversion and stripping off pad characters is not necessarily equivalent to the text domain representation that results from converting en masse to text the concatenation of the same set of binary strings and then stripping off pad characters.

In the latter case knowledge of the set of binary strings is lost because the resultant conversion may have bits from two binary bytes concatenated in one text character. Restated, the problem with standard Base64 is that it does not preserve byte boundaries after the en-masse conversion of concatenated binary strings. Consequently, standard naive Base64 does not provide two-way or true composability as defined above.

To elaborate, the number of pad characters appended with standard Base64 encoding is a function of the length of the binary string. Let N be the length in bytes of the binary string. Recall from the examples above that a single byte 8 bits requires two Base64 characters.

The first encodes 6 bits and the second the remaining 2 bits for a total of 8 bits. The last character is selected such that its non-coding 4 bits are zero. Thus two additional pad characters are required to pad out the resulting conversion so that its length is an integer multiple of 4 Base64 characters. Recall from the examples above that two bytes 16 bits requires three Base64 characters.

The first two encode 6 bits each for 12 bits and the third encodes the remaining 4 bits for a total of The last character is selected such that its non-coding 2 bits are zero. Thus one additional trailing pad character is required to pad out the resulting conversion so that its length is an integer multiple of 4 characters.

Thus the number of leading pre-pad zeroed bytes needed to align the binary string on a bit boundary is the same as the number of trailing pad characters needed to align the converted Base64 text string on a bit boundary.

Likewise, no leading pad bytes are required to ensure the length of the binary string is an integer multiple of 3 bytes. Thus, in all three cases, the number of trailing post-pad characters, if any, needed to align the converted Base64 text string on a bit boundary is the same as the number of leading pre-pad bytes, if any, needed to align the binary string on a bit boundary.

The number of required trailing Base64 post-pad characters or equivalently the number of leading pre-pad zeroed bytes to ensure 24 bit alignment may be computed with the following formula: ¶.

Recall that composability is provided here by prepending text codes that are of the appropriate length to ensure bit boundaries in both the T and the corresponding B domain. The advantage of this approach is that naive Base64 software tooling may be used to convert back and forth between the T and B domains, i. T B is naive Base64 encode, and B T is naive Base64 decode.

In other words, CESR primitives are compatible with existing Base64 RFC tooling. Whereas new software tooling is needed for conversions between the R and T domains, e. T R and R T and the R and B domains, e. The pad size computation is also useful for computing the size of the text codes.

Because true composability also requires that the T domain value MUST be an integer multiple of 4 characters in length the size of the text code MUST also be a function of the pad size, ps , and hence the length of the raw binary element, N. Thus the size of the text code in Base64 characters is a function of the equivalent pad size determined by the length N mod 3 of the raw binary value.

If we let M be a non-negative integer-valued variable then we have three cases: ¶. The minimum code sizes are 1, 2, and 4 characters for pad sizes of 1, 2, and 0 characters with M equaling 0, 0, and 1 respectively. By increasing M we can have larger code sizes for a given pad size. For the one byte raw binary string a , ps is two. The pre-padded conversion results in the following: ¶. where ZX represents a zeroed pre-pad byte, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, AX represents a byte from a , aX represents a bit from a , and TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded a.

Noteworthy is that the first two i. ps characters of the conversion, namely, T3T2 does not include any bits of information from a. This also means that T3T2 can be modified after conversion without impacting the appearance or value of the converted a that appears solely in T1T0 , i. there is no overlap. Moreover, the resulting Base64 conversion of a is right aligned with respect to the trailing Base64 character. This means that one can "read" and understand the numerical values for a from such an unshifted Base64 conversion.

This also means that a text-based parser on a character-by-character basis can cleanly process T3T2 separate from the Base64 encoding of a that appears in T1T0. Given this separation we could replace T3T2 with two character Base64 textual type code C1C0 as follows: ¶. where ZX represents a zeroed pre-pad byte, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, AX represents a byte from a , aX represents a bit from a , TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded a , SX represents a Base64 code character replacing one of the TX , and sX is a code bit.

The resultant four character Base64 encoded primitive would be C1C0T1T0. When C1C0T1T0 is converted back to binary from Base64 the result would be as follows: ¶. where CX represents a Base64 code character replacing one of the TX , cX is a code bit, UX represents byte from converted code char which may include zeroed bits, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, AX represents a byte from a , aX represents a bit from a , and TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded a.

Stripping off U1U0 leaves a in its original state. Noteworthy is that the code characters only are effectively left shifted 4 bits after conversion. The code characters S1S0 can be recovered as the first two characters obtained from simply converting U1O0 only back to Base For the two byte raw binary string b , ps is one.

where ZX represents a zeroed pre-pad byte, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, BX represents a byte from b , bX represents a bit from b , and TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded b. Noteworthy is that the first one i. ps character of the conversion, namely, T3 , does not include any bits of information from b.

This also means that T3 can be modified after conversion without impacting the appearance or value of the converted b that appears solely in T2T1T0 , i. Moreover, the resulting Base64 conversion of b is right aligned with respect to the trailing Base64 character.

This means that one can "read" and understand the numerical values for b from such an unshifted Base64 conversion. This also means that a text-based parser on a character-by-character basis can cleanly process T3 separate from the Base64 encoding of b that appears in T2T1T0.

Given this separation we could replace T3 with one character Base64 textual type code C0 as follows: ¶. where ZX represents a zeroed pre-pad byte, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, BX represents a byte from b , bX represents a bit from b , TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded b , SX represents a Base64 code character replacing one of the TX , and sX is a code bit,.

The resultant four character Base64 encoded primitive would be S0T2T1T0. When S0T2T1T0 is converted back to binary from Base64 the result would be as follows: ¶. where SX represents a Base64 code character replacing one of the TX , sX is a code bit, UX represents byte from converted code char which may include zeroed bits, zX represents a zeroed pre-pad bit, BX represents a byte from b , bX represents a bit from b , and TX represents a Base64 character that results from the Base64 conversion of the pre-padded b.

Stripping off U0 leaves b in its original state. Noteworthy is that the code character only is effectively left shifted 4 bits after conversion. The code character S0 can be recovered as the first character obtained from simply converting U0 only to Base For the three byte raw binary string c , ps is zero. So prepadding is not needed. Without pad characters, however, that there is no room to hold a type code. Consequently any text type code is just prepended to the conversion.

The prepended type code MUST be an integer multiple of four Base64 characters. Let, S3S2S1S0 be the type code then the full primitive with code and converted raw binary is given by the eight character Base64 string S3S2S1S0T3T2T1T0. When S3S2S1S0T3T2T1T0 is converted back to binary, there is no overlapp or bit shifting because both the code and raw binary c are each seperately aligned on twenty-four bit boundaries.

Suppose for example that we wish to encode two byte raw binary numbers into CESR using the pre-pad approach described above. In order to achieve twenty-four bit alignment, the pre-pad size for two byte numbers is 1 byte. As described above this mean the minimally sized text code is 1 Base64 character. Suppose that the text code is M Base The following table provides examples of encoding the different two byte raw binary values in the three domains: raw, text, and binary.

Recall that raw domain is expressed by a tuple of code, raw where the code is Base64 text and the raw is the raw binary value without code. For readability, raw binary values are represented in hexidecimal notation. With this approach both the binary and text domain representations are as compact as possible for a fully qualified primitive that satisfies the composability property.

The text domain representation has a stable readable code and a stable readable value. The binary domain is value right aligned. The text domain representation consists of 4 text printable characters from the Base64 set of characters and the binary domain representation consists of 3 bytes.

This makes the primitive self-framing. As mentioned above one of the primary advantages of composable encoding is that special framing codes can be specified to support groups of primitives.

Grouping enables pipelining. Other suitable terms for these special framing codes are group codes or count codes for short. These are suitable terms because these framing codes can be used to count characters, primitives in a group, or groups of primitives in a larger group when parsing and off-loading a stream of CESR primitives.

A count code is it's own composable primitive and its length therefore MUST be an integer multiple of four characters in the text domain or equivalently an integer multiple of three bytes in the binary domain.

To clarify, a count code is primitive that does not include a raw binary value, only its text code. Because a count code's raw binary element value is empty and its length is an integer multiple of four characters three bytes , its pad size is always 0. To elaborate, we can use count codes as separators to better organize a stream of primitives or to interleave non-native non-CESR serializations. Count codes enable the grouping together of any combination of primitives, groups of primitives, or non-native serializations to optimize pipelining and offloading.

As mentioned above, one extremely useful property of CESR is that special count codes enable CESR to be interleaved with other serializations. For example, Many applications use JSON [ JSON ] [ RFC ] , CBOR [ CBOR ] [ RFC ] , or MsgPack MGPK [ MGPK ] to serialize flexible self-describing data structures based on field maps, also known as dictionaries or hash tables.

With respect to field map serializations, CESR primitives may appear in two different contexts. The first context is as a delimited text primitive inside of a field map serialization. The delimited text may be either the key or value of a key, value pair. The second context is as a standalone serialization that is interleaved with field map serializations in a stream.

Special CESR count codes enable support for the second context of interleaving standalone CESR with other serializations. After a cold start, a stream processor looks for framing information to know how to parse groups of elements in the stream. If that framing information is ambiguous then the parser may become confused and require yet another cold start. While processing a given stream a parser may become confused especially if a portion of the stream is malformed in some way.

This usually requires flushing the stream and forcing a cold start to resynchronize the parser to subsequent stream elements. Better yet is a re-synchronization mechanism that does not require flushing the in-transit buffers but merely skipping to the next well-defined stream element boundary in order to execute a cold start.

Good cold start re-synchronization is essential to robust performant stream processing. For example, in TCP a cold start usually means closing and then reopening the TCP connection. Binary Option Brokers: Payment Methods Binary Options Brokers Accepting Credit Cards Binary Options Brokers Accepting the Visa Card Binary Options Brokers Accepting Mastercard Binary Options Brokers Accepting Amex American Express Binary Options Brokers Accepting Paypal A Comprehensive Review and Investigation of Scam Binary Options Cesr binary option Accepting Paypal Deposits and Withdrawals Binary Options Brokers Accepting Prepaid Credit Cards Binary Options Brokers Accepting Moneybookers Skrill Binary Options Brokers that Accept Liberty Reserve Deposits Binary Options Brokers Accepting Paypal Binary Options Brokers Accepting Cashu Binary Options Brokers Accepting Ukash Binary Options Brokers Accepting Neteller, cesr binary option.

Archive June October February January October August June January December November February July June May April March February January December November October September August July June May April Twitter How to make a smooth transition from Forex to Binary Options?

prev Cesr binary option Capital. Cedar Finance. Redwood Options. Resources Top 5 Performing Stock: Analysts Picks for a Long Hold Scam Crypto Robots Scam Bitcoin Robot, cesr binary option. Binary Options Broker Reviews EasyXP Broker Review Traderush Broker Review 24Option Broker Review. com © Copyright binaryoptionsanalyst. com All Rights Reserved.

Managed By Binary Options Analyst Proudly powered by WordPress. Recommended Sites. As well, the FSA is apart of the CESR Committee of European Securities Regulators.

These regulatory powers provide stable and secure financial brokerages in Denmark. However, the trading of binary options is unregulated in Denmark, just as in most of Europe A binary option is a contract purchased by a trader, which pays a pre-determined amount if their prediction is correct. com, they are priced in US dollars Binary Options Terms Trading binary options can be very profitable, but it is also a specialized market which has its own lexicon. If you want to trade binary options, here is a.

Binary options occasionally trade on platforms regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission SEC and other agencies, but most binary options trading occurs outside the United States and may not be regulated. Unregulated binary options brokers don't have to meet a particular standard. Therefore, investors should be wary of the potential for fraud. Conversely, vanilla options trade on regulated U.

exchanges and are subject to U. options market regulations. Nadex is a regulated binary options exchange in the U. Nadex binary options are based on a "yes or no" proposition and allow traders to exit before expiry. If the trader wanted to make a more significant investment, they could change the number of options traded.

Non-Nadex binary options are similar, except they typically aren't regulated in the U. Securities and Exchange Commission. Accessed May 14, Trading Instruments. Options and Derivatives. Company News Markets News Cryptocurrency News Personal Finance News Economic News Government News. Your Money. Personal Finance. Your Practice. Popular Courses. Trading Skills Trading Instruments.

What Is a Binary Option? Key Takeaways Binary options depend on the outcome of a "yes or no" proposition. Traders receive a payout if the binary option expires in the money and incur a loss if it expires out of the money.

Binary Options Terms Trading binary options can be very profitable, but it is also a specialized market which has its own lexicon. If you want to trade binary options, here is a A binary option is a contract purchased by a trader, which pays a pre-determined amount if their prediction is correct. Commodities are resources that are grown or extracted from the ground, such as silver, gold and oil.

On blogger. To be specific, if you open a real money trading account with a FINRA-licensed broker you cesr binary option much know what you are getting. The traditional brokers or exchanges make their money cesr binary option on the margins or percentages charged according to the volumes of trades executed. Contrarily, cesr binary option , the CYSEC-licensed brokers operate differently. In their business model the trading algorithm ignores the volume of trades cesr binary option this context.

Of course they want you to trade more, but only in the sense …. Binary Options Analyst Proudly powered by WordPress. English French German Italian Spanish Arabic Binary Options Reports, cesr binary option. Home Broker Reviews EasyXP Broker Review Traderush Broker Review 24Option Broker Review Trading Strategies Straddle or Die: Hedge Your Risk or Increase It? Binary Options Regulation Binary Options Trading Regulation: Is it Legal?

Binary Options Trading Regulation: Is it Legal? Binary Options Analyst » Tag Archives: binary options CESR Binary Options Trading Regulation: Is it Legal? Of course they want you to trade more, but only in the sense … Posted in Binary Options RegulationTrading Guide Tagged binary options algorithmbinary options bonusesbinary options brokersbinary options cboebinary options CESRbinary options cysecbinary options exchangesbinary options implied volatilitybinary options nadexbinary options platformbinary options regulationbinary options variance notionalbinary options vega notionalexotic optionsinvest in binary optionstrade binary options online.

Subscribe to our newsletter Enter cesr binary option email address:. Online Brokers Reviews Brokerage Capital Review Bloombex Options Review Titan Trade Review GTOptions Review Binary Review Ubinary Review Traderush Broker Review Redwood Options Broker Review Regal Options Review Optimarkets Review 24Option Broker Review EasyXP Broker Review Anyoption Broker Review Goptions Review GlobalTrader Review Grand Option Review Interactive Option Review Cherry Trade Review Boss Capital Review Swift Option Review Optionrally Review.

EUR and Mr. How to Make a Smooth Transition from a Sour Stock to a Sweet Commodity Signal VS Social Trading — A Strategic Analysis for Forex Binary Options, cesr binary option.

Binary options guide Virtnext Scam Review Binary Secret Code Review Binary Options Non-Farm Payrolls NFP Trading Strategies Top Undervalued Stock Ripe for the Picking: Analysis for Experienced Binary Options Traders Learn How to Make Money Trading Binary Options Redwood Options How To Withdraw Money Learn How to Use the Ubinary Flip Feature NightHawk System Scam Review Boss Capital How to Make Your Withdrawal German Binary Robot Review German Binary Robot Binary Signals Club Why Are People Complaining About Binary Options Scams How Do Scam Brokers Operate and How to Identify Them Binary Profit Method Review SafeGuard Trader is a Malicious SCAM, Review Exposes Fake App Quantum Code is a Scam!

Review Exposes Fake App Zero Loss Formula is cesr binary option SCAM! Bitcoin Code SCAM Review, Steve McKay Is A Fake. Binary options education Centument LTD is a SCAM — Honest Review Exposes Fake APP Insured Profits is a Scam Free Money System is a Scam Binary Options Cash Back Review Top 5 Binary Options Trading Tips for Five Most Common Mistakes Made by Binary Options Traders iOption Shuts Down Will Redwood Options Have 30 Second and 2 Minute Options Available Gemini 2 is a SCAM, Review Exposes Fake Brandon Lewis BinaryScamAlerts.

Com Exposes Fake SCAM Review Sites, Threats Received! Binary Option Brokers: Payment Methods Binary Options Brokers Accepting Credit Cards Binary Options Brokers Accepting the Visa Card Binary Options Brokers Accepting Mastercard Binary Options Brokers Accepting Amex American Express Binary Options Brokers Accepting Paypal A Comprehensive Review and Investigation of Scam Binary Options Cesr binary option Accepting Paypal Deposits and Withdrawals Binary Options Brokers Accepting Prepaid Credit Cards Binary Options Brokers Accepting Moneybookers Skrill Binary Options Brokers that Accept Liberty Reserve Deposits Binary Options Brokers Accepting Paypal Binary Options Brokers Accepting Cashu Binary Options Brokers Accepting Ukash Binary Options Brokers Accepting Neteller, cesr binary option.

Archive June October February January October August June January December November February July June May April March February January December November October September August July June May April Twitter How to make a smooth transition from Forex to Binary Options? prev Cesr binary option Capital. Cedar Finance. Redwood Options. Resources Top 5 Performing Stock: Analysts Picks for a Long Hold Scam Crypto Robots Scam Bitcoin Robot, cesr binary option.

Binary Options Broker Reviews EasyXP Broker Review Traderush Broker Review 24Option Broker Review. com © Copyright binaryoptionsanalyst. com All Rights Reserved. Managed By Binary Options Analyst Proudly powered by WordPress. Recommended Sites. As well, the FSA is apart of the CESR Committee of European Securities Regulators. These regulatory powers provide stable and secure financial brokerages in Denmark. However, the trading of binary options is unregulated in Denmark, just as in most of Europe A binary option is a contract purchased by a trader, which pays a pre-determined amount if their prediction is correct.

com, they are priced in US dollars Binary Options Terms Trading binary options can be very profitable, but it is also a specialized market which has its own lexicon.

If you want to trade binary options, here is a. Post a Comment. Tuesday, September 28, Cesr binary option. Cesr binary option Binary Options Terms Trading binary options can be very profitable, but it is also a specialized market which has its own lexicon. at September 28, Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest. Labels: No comments:. Newer Post Older Post Home. Subscribe to: Post Comments Atom.

This also means that a text-based parser on a character-by-character basis can cleanly process T3T2 separate from the Base64 encoding of a that appears in T1T0. Large Fixed Raw Size Table With 1 Lead Byte This table uses 2 as its first character or selector. Noteworthy is that the code character only is effectively left shifted 4 bits after conversion. Performant Resynchronization with Unique Start Bits Given the popularity of three specific serializations, namely, JSON, CBOR, and MGPK, more fine-grained serialization boundary detection for interleaving CESR may be highly beneficial for both performance and robustness reasons. This also means that T3T2 can be modified after conversion without impacting the appearance or value of the converted a that appears solely in T1T0 , i.

Categories:

• Binary Options
• Forex Bitcoin
• Forex Brokers
• Forex
• Binary Options online