December 2016 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Roma, 16 dicembre convegno sul nuovo regolamento privacy e applicazione nel settore pubblico e privato
by Mauro Alovisio Dec. 8, 2016

Dec. 8, 2016

Gent.me/mi segnalo convegno gratuito di interesse a Roma sul nuovo regolamento europeo privacy organizzato dalla fondazione Basso il prossimo 16 dicembre,fra i relatori: prof .Stefano Rodotà, Giovanni Buttarelli, Angelo Marcello Cardani*, * dirigenti del Garante privacy, avvocati (posti limitati, evento accreditato per la formazione degli avvocati) per informazioni e programma: http://www.fondazionebasso.it/2015/16-dicembre-9h00-il-nuovo-regolamento-pr… Cordiali saluti Mauro Alovisio

1 0

Regarding the Report of the Presidential Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 7, 2016

Dec. 7, 2016

Herb Lin, uno degli autori del recente rapporto US sulla Cybersecurity riassume quello che c'è nel report: - la cybersecurity è carente per via di una market failure. - IoT dirimerà la questione sulla liability del software (ad es. il tostapane IoT che brucia la casa) - la regulation serve, specie se non vengono seguite le linee guida. Mi pare un punto di vista interessante e utile anche in UE. <https://www.lawfareblog.com/regarding-report-presidential-commission-enhanc…> [] >From my own perspective, it’s worth calling attention to a number of salient points that are implied but not explicitly stated in the report. * The market has failed to provide the United States with the cybersecurity posture that it needs. Indeed, if this were not true, the commission would not have been necessary in the first place. In my view, market failure is reflected in two ways—one easier to fix, the other harder. * The first aspect of market failure is that individual entities do not do all that they should be doing to provide for their own cybersecurity needs—they don’t realize the scope and nature of the threats they face, they don’t know how to respond to those threats, they have higher and more immediate priorities for action, and so on. The report thus emphasizes ways for citizens and private sector entities to increase awareness and to plan for their cybersecurity needs using the NIST cybersecurity framework <https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework>. * The second aspect of market failure is that if these individual entities did do all that they needed to do to provide for their own cybersecurity needs (or more precisely, all that they could reasonably be expected to do), the resulting cybersecurity posture of the nation would be better than it is today. However, that posture would still be inadequate from a national perspective because of the interdependencies between these entities—the very concept of critical infrastructure rests on this premise. The report thus points out that the U.S. government has ultimate responsibility for defending the nation’s critical infrastructure, acknowledging that there are some cyber threats to the nation that the private sector working alone cannot be expected to handle. This second aspect of market failure is much harder to address than the first, because it is not in any entity’s self-interest to do for the nation more than it needs to do for itself. []

1 0

Espionnage d’Air France, d’Israël et de l’Autorité palestinienne : nouvelles révélations Snowden
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 7, 2016

Dec. 7, 2016

Oltre alle nuove rivelazioni sorprende che Le Monde dichiari di avere accesso all'intero Snowden Archive... <http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2016/12/07/espionnage-d-air-france-d-i…> Grâce à un partenariat exclusif avec le site d’information « The Intercept », « Le Monde » a pu travailler sur l’intégralité des archives Snowden et en extrait aujourd’hui de nouvelles révélations. []

1 0

Reuters: New Zealand passport robot tells applicant of Asian descent to open eyes
by Guido Gorgoni Dec. 7, 2016

Dec. 7, 2016

>From Reuters News: New Zealand passport robot tells applicant of Asian descent to open eyes http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN13W0RE A New Zealand man of Asian descent had his passport photograph rejected when facial recognition software mistakenly registered his eyes as being closed. This service is not intended to encourage spam. The details provided have been used for the sole purpose of facilitating this email communication and have not been retained by Thomson Reuters.

1 0

First settlement reached under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 7, 2016

Dec. 7, 2016

<http://www.biometricupdate.com/201612/first-settlement-reached-under-illino…> December 6, 2016 - Last week, a judge in Cook County Circuit Court in Chicago issued final approval for a $1.5 million settlement between L.A. Tan Enterprises Inc. and a class of the franchise’s customers who claim it failed to properly handle their biometric information, according to a report by Bloomberg Law <https://bol.bna.com/first-settlement-reached-under-illinois-biometric-law/>. It is the first settlement reached under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, which requires companies to gain consent before collecting a person’s biometric data. According to reports, the L.A. Tan franchise used fingerprint technology rather than a key fob to identify its customers in a membership database. The lawsuit claimed L.A. Tan did not obtain written consent from customers to use this data, or provide information about how it would store their biometric data and when, if ever, that data might be destroyed if customers dropped their membership, the franchise closed or other circumstances arose. Under the settlement, L.A. Tan will use the $1.5 million fund to put processes in place to comply with the Illinois statute or destroy all biometric data it still holds and pay each class member who filed a claim with a check for $125. A dozen lawsuits have been brought under the Illinois law including suits against Facebook, Google and Snapchat related to the way its facial recognition algorithm suggests users tag people in photos. The suits, which are pending in federal court in Northern California, accuse the companies of failing to notify users that their facial recognition software was collecting biometric data.

1 0

Making a Positive Impact: Updating the ACM Code of Ethics
by Diego Latella Dec. 6, 2016

Dec. 6, 2016

Segnalo Making a Positive Impact: Updating the ACM Code of Ethics By Bo Brinkman, <http://dl.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81100045288>Don Gotterbarn, <http://dl.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81406594705>Keith Miller, <http://dl.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81452611681>Marty J. Wolf <http://dl.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81339536343> appena pubblicato sulle Communications dell’ACM (Dec. 2016). DL Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR-ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) http://www.isti.cnr.it/People/D.Latella - ph: +390506212982, mob: +39 348 8283101, fax: +390506212040 =================== The quest for a war-free world has a basic purpose: survival. But if in the process we learn how to achieve it by love rather than by fear, by kindness rather than compulsion; if in the process we learn how to combine the essential with the enjoyable, the expedient with the benevolent, the practical with the beautiful, this will be an extra incentive to embark on this great task. Above all, remember your humanity. -- Sir Joseph Rotblat

1 0

Russia Gains an Upper Hand in the Cyber Norms Debate
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 6, 2016

Dec. 6, 2016

Interessante pezzo sul confronto US-Russia sulla proibizione dell'interferenza internazionale via cyberspace. <http://blogs.cfr.org/cyber/2016/12/05/russia-gains-an-upper-hand-in-the-cyb…> []Nevertheless, in a 2011 letter to the United Nations General Assembly outlining a proposal for an “International Code of Conduct for Information Security”, the Russian coalition proposed a codification of this concept, stipulating that states subscribing to the Code pledge to “not use information and communications technologies and other information and communications networks to interfere with the internal affairs of other states or with the aim of undermining their political, economic and social stability.” In parallel, Russia and others have pushed to further solidify this and other proposed norms in treaty form. Russia’s information operations could conceivably radically reshape the cyber norms debate and puts the United States in a predicament. Russia is ironically in a better position to advocate the need for binding rules to prohibit non-interference through cyberspace. Even though Moscow is widely believed to be behind the U.S. election shenanigans, it can still argue that a non-interference rule, had it been in place, could have prevented the election tampering. That puts the United States in the unenviable position of publicly arguing for a ban on using cyber means to interfere in the internal affairs of states but having to reject a seemingly ready-made solution. Almost no one in the U.S. intelligence or national security community actually believes that Russia would abide by a cyber non-interference pact. Furthermore, many in the U.S. cyber policy community in government do not see new treaties as a viable option for cyberspace given the unique challenge of monitoring and verification that exist in the cyber domain. Nevertheless, Russia and its allies can use the election tampering as evidence new UN cyber treaties or codes of conduct are necessary. []

1 0

CEIPI Opinion on a EU Proposal for a Neighbouring Right for Press Publishers Online
by GC F Dec. 6, 2016

Dec. 6, 2016

Dear all, At CEIPI <http://www.ceipi.edu/en/>, I have co-authored with Christophe Geiger and Oleksandr Bulayenko a position paper discussing the proposed introduction in EU law of neighbouring rights for press publishers for the digital uses of their publications. The proposal is included in the European Commission’s Draft Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market of 14 September 2016. Below you find the summary of the paper: Among its key features, the European Commission’s planned copyright reform proposes to introduce in EU copyright law neighbouring rights for press publishers. This proposal is (i) contrary to the objective of creating a Digital Single Market, (ii) detrimental for authors’ interests, and (iii) does not solve any systemic issues of the EU copyright system for the reasons stated below. - The Directive Proposal—and the documents accompanying it—fail to explain how an additional layer of 28 national rights might promote the Digital Single Market. Rather, the proposal poses further challenges related to the territoriality of rights and their fragmentation. In addition, as there is already no uniform approach to exceptions or limitations to 28 national authors’ rights, 28 additional national rights for publishers will suffer the same uncertainty, making the Digital Single Market harder to reach. - Granting rights to ever more actors will reduce the economic value of each right covering essentially the same economic use. While the Impact Assessment accompanying the Directive Proposal concludes that the “introduction of a related right covering digital uses of press publications is not expected to generate higher licence fees for online service providers”, it fails to assess the impact of the Directive Proposal on authors. As the “pie” does not get any bigger, the authors’ share will inevitably decrease. Ultimately, this might undermine the overall functioning of the copyright system, especially because it should primarily secure fair remunerations to creators (rather than only compensate the investment of rightholders), while at the same time providing access to users. - In this regard, the Impact Assessment fails to demonstrate a causal link between publishers’ revenues and investments and granting them neighbouring rights to press publications—and/or promoting mechanisms facilitating initial ownership of authors’ rights by publishers. In contrast, recent empirical evidence from national implementation of publishers’ neighbouring rights confirmed a negative impact on small publishers, while news aggregators might have a positive effect on online news sites. This might have negative repercussions on plurality of sources, users’ access to information—and therefore on democratization. Also, increasing barriers to innovation and desincentivizing new business models might be an additional effect of the reform. - The Directive Proposal does not limit the subject matter to publications presently protected by authors’ rights. It goes far beyond, restricting, for example, uses of works in the public domain. Lifting materials out of the public domain has unwanted consequences, impinging greatly on freedom of expression and democratization, while favouring centralization of information. - Any economic input into the value chain of creative activities does not merit the grant of a property right. Also, a grant of a neighbouring right to one economic actor cannot be a reason for granting such right to another one. Moreover, the Directive Proposal does not follow any meaningful logic of investment reward, since it proposes to grant rights to any publication, even those that do not involve any substantive investment. For example, publication of any trivial information on a “news website” will be sufficient for the grant of neighbouring rights. - Finally, in any event, if this proposal is ever going to be approved, the scope of protection—extending also to non-commercial uses—and the term of protection are overbroad. The CEIPI Opinion is available here <http://www.ceipi.edu/en/news/piece-of-news/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=9416&cHa…> .

1 0

Re: [nexa] Sulla Rivista Il Mulino in edicola si parla di economie digitali
by giovanni arata Dec. 5, 2016

Dec. 5, 2016

Buongiorno, con l'occasione condivido il link all'ultima bozza pre-stampa dell'articolo in oggetto- non è stato possibile pubblicarlo in toto o in parte online per divieto dell'Editrice. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-UwY2ixX3ehZFA3dVFLNnRMX3c/view Per mia parte resto a disposizione per ogni informazione o chiarimento. Buon pomeriggio, giovanni > ---------- Messaggio inoltrato ---------- > Da: *J.C. DE MARTIN* <demartin(a)polito.it> > Data: domenica 4 dicembre 2016 > Oggetto: [nexa] Sulla Rivista Il Mulino in edicola si parla di economie > digitali > A: Nexa <nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it> > > > C'è anche un articolo del Fellow Nexa Giovanni Arata :) > > Buona domenica e buon voto referendario, > > juan carlos > > > > > -- giovanni arata 333.2708043 medium <https://medium.com/@giovanni_arata> linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/giovanniarata> twitter <https://twitter.com/giovanni_arata>

1 0

Italian court nixes website block, says embedding isn’t copyright infringement
by Guido Noto La Diega Dec. 5, 2016

Dec. 5, 2016

Fulvio Sarzana intervistato da Ars Technica sul caso kisstube e la liceita' attività di "linkare" a file protetti a diritto d’autore o di "embeddarli" http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/12/italian-court-nixes-website-bl… -- Guido Dr Guido Noto La Diega Lecturer at the Northumbria University President of "Ital-IoT" School of Law City Campus East, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST noto.la.diega(a)gmail.com +44(0)191 349 5562 @guidonld You can access my papers on Academia.edu and on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you. Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail.

1 0