November 2015 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

EDRI: "Launch of the EU Internet Forum – behind closed doors and without civil society"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Dal 5 agosto, mi era sfuggito. Qualcuno ha per caso aggiornamenti? jc https://edri.org/launch-of-the-eu-internet-forum-behind-closed-doors-and-wi… Launch of the EU Internet Forum – behind closed doors and without civil society <https://edri.org/launch-of-the-eu-internet-forum-behind-closed-doors-and-wi…> By Kirsten Fiedler The European Commission has confirmed to EDRi that it is preparing to partner with US online companies in order to plan the arbitrary monitoring and censorship of European citizens and, contrary to previous assurances, will exclude civil society from these discussions. More disturbingly, this is happening at the same time as the US is preparing the “Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act” (CISA), which grants US companies a “safe harbour” from liability for any damage they cause when enacting counter-measures against security risks. Last monthwe reported <https://edri.org/eu-commission-rebrand-failed-cleanit-project/> that, from time to time, the European Commission launches talks with the Internet industry to encourage companies to take “voluntary” action to fight against allegedly illegal or unwanted online activity. Very often, however, these projects seem to be launched or financed without any consideration for lessons learned from past (and mostly failed) enforcement initiatives. Take, for example, theCleanIT project <https://edri.org/rip-cleanit/>, which proposed that online companies should prevent anonymous use of online services, implement automated detection systems and remove content on the simple request of law enforcement authorities “without following the more labour-intensive and formal procedures for ‘notice and action’”. In March 2015, a European Union document on the “fight against terrorism” (pdf <http://www.statewatch.org/news/2015/mar/eu-council-cosi-terrorism-riga-stat…>) charged the Commission with the creation of a “Forum with the Internet service providers community” in order to contribute to Europol’s work (even though this project had beenlaunched a year earlier <http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-304_en.htm>). Since then, no information has been made public as regards the progress of this “EU Internet Forum”. Obviously, we wanted to know more and sent an “access to documents” request to the European Commission.In May, the Commission responded <https://edri.org/eu-commission-rebrand-failed-cleanit-project/>, claiming that no documents existed since the forum was not set up at the time of our request. A couple of exchanges and months later, the Commission sent us some – not all – of the requested documents. We received: * The response from the Commission:https://edri.org/files/ForumISPs_reply_Fiedler_2015-3658.pdf * The report of the preparatory meeting on 7 May 2015:https://edri.org/files/ForumISPs_report_meeting_20150507.pdf * The draft agenda for a preparatory meeting on 7 May 2015:https://edri.org/files/ForumISPs_meeting_20150507.pdf * The invitation for the first awareness raising meeting to prepare the launch of the Internet Forum 24 July:https://edri.org/files/ForumISPs_Invitation_awareness_raising_20150724… * The draft agenda 24 July:https://edri.org/files/ForumISPs_Agenda_awareness_raising_20150724.pdf These documents reveal that the Commission organised two meetings of the Forum to prepare the official launch of the EU Internet Forum scheduled for the end of the year. These preparatory meetings took place on 27 May and 24 July. Companies were invited to discuss “challenges and scope of engagement in countering online terrorism activity” by, for example, “reducing accessibility” and by challenging “the terrorist narrative online”. An earlier Communication on the EU’s Agenda on Security also stated the objective to explore “the concerns of law enforcement authorities on new encryption technologies” (pdf <http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/documents/basic-documents/do…>). Among the planned activities of the forum are awareness-raising activities for Member States, training sessions and workshops, as well as “reaching out to smaller companies” to enable them to respond to removal requests. A preparatory meeting took place on 27 May and a meeting to “raise awareness” on 24 July. Despite the fact that the European Agenda on Security initially announced the launch of this “EU-level Forum with IT companies to bring them together with law enforcement authorities*and civil society*” (emphasis added), we learn from the documents that the Commission did not contact any civil society groups to take part since “it does not directly communicate with community groups or citizens”. The Commission does not explain further why only industry was invited while human rights organisations and NGOs in the field of information technology were ignored. It seems the idea to have civil society on board has been dropped entirely. However, the Commission refers tolinks on the website of the Radicalisation Awareness Network <http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/networks/radicalisation_awa…>– apparently in the hope that this would be sufficient to make citizens aware of DG Home’s activities. In its reply to us, the Commission unfortunately refused to grant us access to preparatory documents of the Forum as it considers that this “could seriously undermine the ability of the Commission and other involved stakeholders to freely exchange their views concerning actions and initiatives to be taken within the IT Forum”. It is clear that discussions regarding activities by online services will directly affect the communications of their customers and therefore ultimately have an impact on citizen’s fundamental right to the freedom of expression. However, human rights organisations and experts in the field of information technologies from academia or civil society do not seem to be considered to be “relevant stakeholders” nor even “interested parties”. The Commission also argues that it wants to remain “free from external pressure” to explore potential policy options, but some policy options seem already decided, such as including the issue of “detection and removal” of alleged terrorist material (meeting report 7 May) in the upcoming meetings. The EU’s Home Affairs Commissioner DimitrisAvramopoulos is now planning a trip to Silicon Valley <http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-15-5342_en.htm>to discuss the upcoming launch of the EU Internet Forum – with US service providers. It is strange that the Commission wishes to remain “free to consider all policy options” while at the same time asking US businesses how online communications should be regulated in Europe. It is even more kafkaesque, when these same US businesses are about to receive near-blanket immunity for activities covered by the draft CISA. This draft Bill grants two new powers to US companies allowing them to launch countermeasures to “cybersecurity threats” and to monitor information systems. The Bill gives immunity to companies for these monitoring activities and whenever they wish to share private data of their customers (including EU customers) with US government agencies – with wide-ranging protection from liability for any damage that they may cause in the process. EDRi-members EFF and Access as well as Fight for the Future are currently campaigning <https://www.stopcyberspying.com/>to stop this fatally flawed Bill. This is a disturbing approach by the US government because, until now, online intermediaries have had little interest in adopting law enforcement roles due to unclear legal protections (“safe harbours”) offered to them in cases where their networks are used for illegal activities. Ever since the failed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) three years ago, the US government has been attempting to change this situation. In Europe, Member States have the obligation to respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights. However, if measures are applied “voluntarily” by private companies, governments’ obligations under the Charter are not active.Many case studies have shown <https://edri.org/files/EDRI_CoE.pdf>, private companies limiting fundamental rights in the online space continue, flouting the principle that restrictions on civil and human rights must be based on law (Articles 8 and 10, European Convention on Human Rights; Article 52, European Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 19, International Convention on Civil and Political Rights). To avoid another failed project pushing for a privatised law enforcement activities through online service providers, we believe that the Commission should seek expert input to examine whether and how regulation of the European online space by US companies has an impact or unintended consequences for the fundamental rights of European citizens. In January, the EU’s Ministers of Interior emphasised the need to safeguard the Internet, “in scrupulous observance of fundamental reedoms, [as] a forum for free expression, in full respect of the law.” We agree. Does the Commission? Also see EDRi’s booklets on the topic: Human rights and privatised law enforcement https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/EDRi_HumanRights_and_PrivLaw_we… The slide form “self-regulation” to corporate censorship https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/selfregualation_paper_20110925_…

Nov. 5, 2015

Reuters: "U.S. government approves Italy's request to arm its drones"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Business | Wed Nov 4, 2015 6:38pm EST *U.S. government approves Italy's request to arm its drones** * WASHINGTON | By Andrea Shalal The U.S. State Department has approved a longstanding request from Italy to arm its two MQ-9 Reaper drones with Hellfire missiles, laser-guided bombs and other munitions, the U.S. Defense Department announced on Wednesday. This would be the first effective sale of armed drones approved since the U.S. government established a policy in February for exports of the new type of weapons that have played a key role in U.S. military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen. [...] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/04/us-italy-usa-drones-idUSKCN0ST1VI…

Nov. 5, 2015

Guardian: "Robot revolution: rise of 'thinking' machines could exacerbate inequality"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*Robot revolution: rise of 'thinking' machines could exacerbate inequality* /Global economy will be transformed over next 20 years at risk of growing inequality, say analysts/ Heather Stewart Thursday 5 November 2015 00.01 GMT A “robot revolution” will transform the global economy over the next 20 years, cutting the costs of doing business but exacerbating social inequality, as machines take over everything from caring for the elderly to flipping burgers, according to a new study. As well as robots performing manual jobs, such as hoovering the living room or assembling machine parts, the development of artificial intelligence means computers are increasingly able to “think”, performing analytical tasks once seen as requiring human judgment. Robot doctors and lawyers? It’s a change we should embrace Daniel Susskind Read more In a 300-page report, revealed exclusively to the Guardian, analysts from investment bank Bank of America Merrill Lynch draw on the latest research to outline the impact of what they regard as a fourth industrial revolution, after steam, mass production and electronics. [---] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/05/robot-revolution-rise-mac…

Nov. 5, 2015

Si può far di meglio

by Diego Giorio

Secondo questo report, i big della new economy potrebbero far di meglio in termini di privacy e libertà d'espressione http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/03/data-protection-failure-g… Saluti a tutti Diego

Nov. 5, 2015

Re: [nexa] Taggalo retail analytics Video+Wifi+Beacon in negozi italiani?

by Stefano Quintarelli

non lo so, anche io non ne sarei certo. avevo valutato questa azienda per dare un parere ad un amico che ci voleva investire e lo avevo scoraggiato se non ricordo male, loro asserivano che 1) la telecamera intelligentte è come una registrazione a circuito chiuso e quindi basta il cartello 2) se il telefono ha il wifi acceso equivale ad un esplicito consenso del cliente ciao, s. On 02/11/2015 16:02, Guido Scorza wrote: > Ma siamo certi dell'esistenza di un procedimento davanti al Garante? > Personalmente non avrei grandi dubbi sull'illiceità della condotta. > > G. > >> Il giorno 02 nov 2015, alle ore 15:20, Alberto Cammozzo <ac+nexa(a)zeromx.net> ha scritto: >> >>> On 02/11/2015 09:02, Marco Ciurcina wrote: >>> >>> In data sabato 31 ottobre 2015 23:06:57, Alberto Cammozzo ha scritto: >>> >>>> Per Taggalo e Altromercato l'impronta biometrica del volto non sarebbe >>> >>>> dato personale. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Che ne dite? >>> >>> non mi è chiaro in cosa consista l'importa biometrica del volto. >>> >>> partendo dall'importa biometrica del volto si potrebbe risalire alla persona di cui si tratta? >> >> Immagino tu intenda l'identità "anagrafica": nome e cognome. >> >> Si può fare a condizione di avere un certo numero di analoghe "impronte" con identità anagrafica con le quali fare un confronto. >> Facebook, ad esempio, potrebbe farlo con grande facilità (e data la convergenza tra marketing e social networks, l'esempio non è nemmeno fantascientifico). >> >> Nel 2011, in tre celebri esperimenti Alessandro Acquisti dimostrò che è possibile risalire a nome e cognome partendo solo dai volti: >> <https://www.cmu.edu/homepage/society/2011/summer/facial-recognition.shtml> >> >> In one experiment, Acquisti's team identified individuals on a popular online dating site where members protect their privacy through pseudonyms. >> In a second experiment, they identified students walking on campus — based on their profile photos on Facebook. >> In a third, the team predicted personal interests and, in some cases, even the Social Security numbers of the students, beginning with only a photo of their faces. >> >> >> Per essere più precisi occorre usare la terminologia corretta, ho usato il termine "impronta" per brevità. >> La terminologia del "Provvedimento generale prescrittivo in tema di biometria" <http://www.garanteprivacy.it/web/guest/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/…> si trova nell'allegato: <http://194.242.234.211/documents/10160/0/All+A+al+Provv.+513+del+12+novembr…> >> >> In questo caso va distinto (cito dall'allegato) >> - Riconoscimento biometrico: si intende il riconoscimento automatico di individui basato su loro caratteristiche biologiche o comportamentali, includendo in tale accezione le nozioni di verifica biometrica e di identificazione biometrica. >> - Identificazione biometrica: ricerca in un archivio, per confronto biometrico automatizzato, di uno o più dati biometrici corrispondenti al dato acquisito. Questo tipo di operazione è detta anche confronto uno a molti e non prevede una fase assertiva. >> - Verifica biometrica: confronto automatizzato tra un modello biometrico acquisito nel momento in cui l’interessato interagisce con il sistema biometrico e un modello biometrico previamente memorizzato e (presuntivamente) a lui corrispondente; questo tipo di verifica è detta confronto uno a uno. >> - enrolment: iscrizione in un sistema, nel caso in oggetto, in un sistema biometrico. La fase di enrolment va dall’acquisizione del campione biometrico alla sua memorizzazione, all’estrazione dei tratti fino alla generazione del riferimento biometrico da archiviare per i confronti successivi; >> >> - Modello biometrico: insieme di tratti biometrici memorizzati informaticamente e direttamente confrontabile con altri modelli biometrici. >> - Riferimento biometrico: modello biometrico utilizzato come termine di confronto e registrato in modo persistente e invariabile nel tempo (a meno di aggiornamenti resi necessari dalle variazioni anche naturali della caratteristica biometrica da cui è estratto). >> >> Nel caso di Taggalo (e stando alle fonti) al momento dell'enrolment non vengono associati i dati anagrafici al modello biometrico. >> Il produttore inoltre dichiara di non conservare l'immagine estratta dal flusso video (cioè il campione biometrico) grazie alla quale è stata acquisito il riferimento biometrico, ma solo il modello. >> >> Questo non toglie che (1) i dati raccolti restino dati personali; (2) che sia possibile associarvi altri dati raccolti contestualmente (come la traccia wifi) o con altri mezzi (ad esempio gli acquisti effettuati alla cassa o i tag rfid registrati all'uscita), e che (3) non sia possibile risalire ai anagrafici dello stesso soggetto o attraverso i dati contestualmente raccolti di cui sopra, oppure attraverso identificazione biometrica, a condizione di confrontare il riferimento biometrico con un archivio di riferimenti di un vasto numero di persone tra cui potrebbe essere presente il soggetto in questione. >> Come detto sopra, non sono pochi ad avere questi archivi e sono in crescita. >> Facebook, Google e buona parte dei SN tra i soggetti privati, e un bel po' di soggetti pubblici (quelli che memorizzano digitalmente una foto). >> Tutti questi potrebbero, a fronte dei riferimenti biometrici dei clienti Altromercato registrati, associare i nomi con facilità. >> >> >> Vedremo cosa deciderà il Garante... >> >> Ciao, >> >> Alberto >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > ----- > Nessun virus nel messaggio. > Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com > Versione: 2016.0.7163 / Database dei virus: 4457/10949 - Data di rilascio: 05/11/2015 >

Nov. 5, 2015

"Artificial Intelligence: Should You Be Worried?" - Prof. Luciano Floridi (University of Oxford), 10 novembre ore 17

by Giuseppe Futia

Se non visualizzi correttamente questo messaggio clicca qui <http://nexa.polito.it/2015/11/lfloridi> NEXA Martedì 10 novembre 2015, ore 17.00 - 19.00 Via Boggio 65/a, Torino (primo piano) http://nexa.polito.it/2015/11/lfloridi Artificial Intelligence: Should You Be Worried? Speaker Luciano Floridi (University of Oxford) Prof. Luciano Floridi (University of Oxford & Trustee of the Nexa Center for Internet & Society (DAUIN)) will discuss: Artificial agents can outsmart us, outperform us, and replace us in an increasing number of tasks. Yet the problem is not a dystopian future, in which some Super-AI will dominate or lives, for this is science fiction. It is rather how we are going to re-interpret who we are, our roles in life, and our still exceptional nature in the universe. BIOGRAFIA - e informazioni supplementari [Maria Bottis] LUCIANO FLORIDI is Professor of Philosophy and Ethics of Information at the University of Oxford, where he is the Director of Research and Senior Research Fellow of the Oxford Internet Institute, Governing Body Fellow of St Cross College, Distinguished Research Fellow of the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, and Research Associate and Fellow in Information Policy of the Department of Computer Science. Outside Oxford, he is Adjunct Professor of the Department of Economics, American University, Washington D.C. More information available at: http://nexa.polito.it/2015/11/lfloridi. Letture consigliate e link utili: * L. Floridi, /The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality/ (Oxford University Press, 2014 * L.Floridi, /The Ethics of Information/ (Oxford University Press, 2013) * L.Floridi, /The Philosophy of Information/ (Oxford University Press, 2011) Che cosa sono il Centro Nexa e i cicli di incontri Mercoledì di Nexa e Nexa Lunch Seminar Il Centro Nexa su Internet & Società del Politecnico di Torino (Dipartimento di Automatica e Informatica) è un centro di ricerca indipendente e interdisciplinare che studia Internet e il suo effetto sulla società. Maggiori informazioni all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/about. Durante i “Mercoledì di Nexa”, che si tengono ogni 2° mercoledì del mese alle ore 18 in punto, il Centro Nexa su Internet e Società apre le sue porte non solo agli esperti e a tutti coloro i quali lavorano con Internet, ma anche a semplici appassionati e cittadini. Il ciclo di incontri intende approfondire, con un linguaggio preciso ma divulgativo, i temi legati alla Rete: motori di ricerca, Creative Commons, social networks, open source/software libero, neutralità della rete, libertà di espressione, privacy, file sharing, big e open data, smart cities e molto altro. Al centro di quasi tutti gli incontri un ospite pronto a dialogare con i direttori del Centro Nexa, il Prof. Juan Carlos De Martin del Politecnico di Torino e il Prof. Marco Ricolfi dell'Università di Torino, nonché lo staff e i Fellows del Centro Nexa. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa, incluso un elenco di tutti i “Mercoledì” passati, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi. Si segnala inoltre che dal maggio 2012 ogni 4° mercoledì del mese dalle ore 13 alle ore 14 il Centro Nexa organizza anche i "Nexa Lunch Seminar". Una lista di tutti i “Lunch Seminar” passati è disponibile all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/lunch-seminars. See our events calendar <http://nexa.polito.it/events> if you're curious about future luncheons, discussions, lectures, and conferences not listed in this email. Our events are free and open to the public, unless otherwise noted. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa e i Nexa Lunch Seminar, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/events. Weekly Events Newsletter. Sign up <http://nexa.polito.it/mailing-lists> to receive this newsletter if this email was forwarded to you. To manage your subscription preferences, please click here <https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>. Connect & get involved: Jobs, internships, and more <http://nexa.polito.it/get-involved> Nexa Center for Internet and Society Newsletter

Nov. 5, 2015

User data plundering by Android and iOS apps is as rampant as you suspected | Ars Technica

by J.C. DE MARTIN

http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/11/user-data-plundering-by-android-and… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

Nov. 5, 2015

The forgotten history of how automakers invented the crime of "jaywalking" - Vox

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Molto interessante. jc http://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

Nov. 4, 2015

"Google, Facebook and others 'falling short' on digital privacy"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Google, Facebook and others 'falling short' on digital privacy By Julie Balise <http://www.sfgate.com/author/julie-balise/> Updated 2:34 pm, Tuesday, November 3, 2015 Google gets a "D" in digital rights -- and it's the best-performing Internet or telecommunications company in a study on freedom of expression and privacy released on Tuesday <https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2015/findings/>. The inaugural Ranking Digital Rights Corporate Accountability Index looked at privacy, freedom of expression and commitment to those policies at eight publicly listed Internet and eight publicly listed telecomunications companies around the world. Researchers scored companies using peer reviews, company feedback and quality control. "There are no 'winners,' " the report says. "Even companies in the lead are falling short. Across the board, companies need to improve their commitments to, and disclosures of, policies and practices that affect users' freedom of expression and privacy. […] Continua qui: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Google-Facebook-and-others-fall-shor…

Nov. 4, 2015

criticità privacy sito

by Mauro Alovisio

Gent.me/mi segnalo interessante criticità privacy riportata oggi sul Corriere della Sera del 4 novembre 2015 http://milano.corriere.it/notizie/cronaca/15_novembre_04/lombardia-informat… Cordiali saluti da Torino Mauro Alovisio

Nov. 4, 2015