- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Herbert Lin - Cyber Risk Across the U.S. Nuclear Enterprise
by Diego.Latella July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

Buongiorno Si tratta certamente di uno degli articoli piu' chiari che mi sia mai capitato di leggere sul nesso cyber-nuclear. Tutti i concetti esposti possono essere compresi facilmente anche _senza_ possedere competenze/conoscenze specifiche ne' su questioni miliatri/nucleari, ne' su questioni cyber/informatiche.Per di piu', alcune considerazioni fatte per esempio sulla transizione _legacy --> modernized-systems_ si possono, a mio avviso, applicare a _qualunque_ sistema digitale. Ne suggerisco vivamente la lettura! https://tnsr.org/2021/06/cyber-risk-across-the-u-s-nuclear-enterprise/ Diego -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://www.isti.cnr.it/People/D.Latella - ph: +390506212982, mob: +39 348 8283101, fax: +390506212040 =================== I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

2 1

The future of Android App Bundles is here
by Giacomo Tesio July 1, 2021

July 1, 2021

Since we launched the Android App Bundle in May 2018, we’ve seen our developer community embrace this new standard to benefit from streamlined releases and advanced distribution features. There are now over 1 million apps using app bundles in production, including the majority of the top 1,000 apps and games on Google Play such as Adobe, Duolingo, Gameloft, Netflix, redBus, Riafy, and Twitter. To bring these benefits to more users and focus on modern Android distribution that benefits all developers, Google Play will start requiring new apps to be published with the Android App Bundle starting August 2021. [...] If you haven’t made the switch to app bundles yet, here are some of the benefits you’re missing: [...] - Play App Signing: Play App Signing, which is required for app bundles, protects your app signing key from loss by using Google’s secure infrastructure and offers the option of upgrading to a new, cryptographically stronger app signing key. ___ Marketing tratto da https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2021/06/the-future-of-android-app… https://web.archive.org/web/20210630211418/https://android-developers.googl… Per chi non lo sapesse, Play App Signing è questa roba qui: ``` When you use Play App Signing, your keys are stored on the same infrastructure that Google uses to store its own keys. Keys are protected by Google’s Key Management Service. ``` https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9842756?hl=en https://web.archive.org/web/20210630211524/https://support.google.com/googl… Così Google terrà al sicuro le chiavi private di chi pubblica applicazioni (ed i loro aggiornamenti) su Google Play. Potrà così decidere autonomamente di aggiornare una applicazione. E visto che Google Play autentica gli utenti, potrà farlo in maniera "personalizzata". Per la sicurezza dell'utente, si intende. Cosa mai potrebbe andare storto? Giacomo

2 1

Conspiracy: in Theory and Practice — Edward Snowden
by Giacomo Tesio June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

The greatest conspiracies are open and notorious — not theories, but practices expressed through law and policy, technology, and finance. Counterintuitively, these conspiracies are more often than not announced in public and with a modicum of pride. They’re dutifully reported in our newspapers; they’re bannered onto the covers of our magazines; updates on their progress are scrolled across our screens — all with such regularity as to render us unable to relate the banality of their methods to the rapacity of their ambitions. The party in power wants to redraw district lines. The prime interest rate has changed. A free service has been created to host our personal files. These conspiracies order, and disorder, our lives; and yet they can’t compete for attention with digital graffiti about pedophile Satanists in the basement of a DC pizzeria. This, in sum, is our problem: the truest conspiracies meet with the least opposition. [...] It took years — eight years and counting in exile — for me to realize that I was missing the point: we talk about conspiracy theories in order to avoid talking about conspiracy practices, which are often too daunting, too threatening, too total. [...] In democracies today, what is important to an increasing many is not what rights and freedoms are recognized, but what beliefs are respected: what history, or story, undergirds their identities as citizens, and as members of religious, racial, and ethnic communities. It’s this replacement-function of false conspiracies — the way they replace unified or majoritarian histories with parochial and partisan stories — that prepares the stage for political upheaval. Especially pernicious is the way that false conspiracies absolve their followers of engaging with the truth. Citizenship in a conspiracy-society doesn’t require evaluating a statement of proposed fact for its truth-value, and then accepting it or rejecting it accordingly, so much as it requires the complete and total rejection of all truth-value that comes from an enemy source, and the substitution of an alternative plot, narrated from elsewhere. [...] Jesse Walker, an editor at Reason and author of The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (2013), offers the following categories of enemy-based conspiracy thinking: - "Enemy Outside," [...] - "Enemy Within," [...] - "Enemy Above," [...] - "Enemy Below," [...] - "Benevolent Conspiracies," [...] Other forms of conspiracy-taxonomy are just a Wikipedia link away [...] I find things to admire in all of these taxonomies, but it strikes me as notable that none makes provision for truth-value. Further, I'm not sure that these or any mode of classification can adequately address the often-alternating, dependent nature of conspiracies, whereby a true conspiracy (e.g. the 9/11 hijackers) triggers a false conspiracy (e.g. 9/11 was an inside job), and a false conspiracy (e.g. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction) triggers a true conspiracy (e.g. the invasion of Iraq). Another critique I would offer of the extant taxonomies involves a reassessment of causality, which is more properly the province of psychology and philosophy. Most of the taxonomies of conspiracy-thinking are based on the logic that most intelligence agencies use when they spread disinformation, treating falsity and fiction as levers of influence and confusion that can plunge a populace into powerlessness, making them vulnerable to new beliefs — and even new governments. But this top-down approach fails to take into account that the predominant conspiracy theories in America today are developed from the bottom-up, plots concocted not behind the closed doors of intelligence agencies but on the open Internet by private citizens, by people. In sum, conspiracy theories do not inculcate powerlessness, so much as they are the signs and symptoms of powerlessness itself. This leads us to those other taxonomies, which classify conspiracies not by their content, or intent, but by the desires that cause one to subscribe to them. Note, in particular, the epistemic/existential/social triad of system-justification: Belief in a conspiracy is considered “epistemic” if the desire underlying the belief is to get at “the truth,” for its own sake; belief in a conspiracy is considered “existential” if the desire underlying the belief is to feel safe and secure, under another's control; while belief in a conspiracy is considered “social” if the desire underlying the belief is to develop a positive self-image, or a sense of belonging to a community. From Outside, from Within, from Above, from Below, from Beyond...events, systems, superconspiracies...shallow and deep heuristics...these are all attempts to chart a new type of politics that is also a new type of identity, a confluence of politics and identity that imbues all aspects of contemporary life. Ultimately, the only truly honest taxonomical approach to conspiracy-thinking that I can come up with is something of an inversion: the idea that conspiracies themselves are a taxonomy, a method by which democracies especially sort themselves into parties and tribes, a typology through which people who lack definite or satisfactory narratives as citizens explain to themselves their immiseration, their disenfranchisement, their lack of power, and even their lack of will. Tratto da https://edwardsnowden.substack.com/p/conspiracy-pt1 (da visitare con le dovute precauzioni... ;-) Giacomo

2 1

Guida alla presentazione della domanda di autorizzazione alla Sperimentazione Clinica che preveda l’utilizzo di sistemi di Intelligenza Artificiale (AI) o di Machine Learning (ML)
by don Luca Peyron June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

Mi pare non sia passato in lista, Buona lettura dl https://www.aifa.gov.it/-/guida-alla-presentazione-della-domanda-di-autoriz… _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

1 0

La cybersecurity
by don Luca Peyron June 30, 2021

June 30, 2021

Non è solo questione informatica... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57624942 dl _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

1 0

EDPB & EDPS call for ban on use of AI for automated recognition of human features in publicly accessible spaces, and some other uses of AI that can lead to unfair discrimination [notsp]
by Diego.Latella June 29, 2021

June 29, 2021

In a joint opinion regarding the European Commission's Proposal for Regulation on artificial intelligence, "[t]aking into account the extremely high risks posed by remote biometric identification of individuals in publicly accessible spaces, the EDPB [European Data Protection Board] and the EDPS [European Data Protection Supervisor] call for a general ban on any use of AI for automated recognition of human features in publicly accessible spaces, such as recognition of faces, gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice, keystrokes and other biometric or behavioural signals, in any context." https://edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2021/edpb-edps-call-ban-use-ai-automated-r… DL -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://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 I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

1 0

Two GAO reports on Defense Cybersecurity and Software Develpment. Just published
by Diego.Latella June 28, 2021

June 28, 2021

Two GAO reports on Defense Cybersecurity and Software Develpment. Just published Defense Cybersecurity: Defense Logistics Agency Needs to Address Risk Management Deficiencies in Inventory Systems https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-278?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_conten… SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT DOD Faces Risks and Challenges in Implementing Modern Approaches and Addressing Cybersecurity Practices https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-351?utm_campaign=usgao_email&utm_conten… All the Best Diego -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://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 I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

1 0

La singolarità tecnologica nell’intelligenza artificiale
by don Luca Peyron June 27, 2021

June 27, 2021

Un buon pezzo divulgativo per comprendere lo stato dell'arte per chi è più spettatore che protagonista dell'arte di cui si parla. Buona lettura dl https://www.ai4business.it/intelligenza-artificiale/la-singolarita-tecnolog… _________________________ don Luca Peyron Direttore Ufficio per la Pastorale Universitaria Arcidiocesi di Torino www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

2 2

The European Legislation on AI: A Brief Analysis of its Philosophical Approach (di Luciano Floridi)
by Giacomo Tesio June 26, 2021

June 26, 2021

From an ethical perspective, the AIA inherits the same foundational approach seen in the GDPR: it is based on protecting human dignity and fundamental rights. This is a very positive feature, even if the current proposal of the AIA is more top-down, less flexible and less focused on the protection of citizens and their rights than the GDPR. Unfortunately, the AIA uses an anachronistic terminology to define this approach as “human-centric”, that is, as an approach that places humanity at the centre of technological development. Yet this is both trivially true and dangerously ambiguous. [...] Fortunately, despite the unfortunate and obsolete terminology, the underlying vision is sound: the AIA emphasises the value of AI as a technology that can be very “green” and provide extraordinary support against pollution and climate change and for the sustainable development of information societies. [...] Correctly, the AIA treats AI as a technology for solving problems and performing tasks, not as some kind of Frankenstein’s monster. Therefore, the proposal excludes the possibility of assigning to AI systems any status as a legal person, with rights and duties, such as the possibility of owning property, entering into contracts, suing and being sued, and so forth. The responsibility of any AI system rests entirely with the people who design, manufacture, market, and use it. Coherently, the proposal stresses the importance of human oversight throughout the text. [...] At times, the text is ambiguous. [...] Some AI systems are discussed as low- or zero-risk, and as such, they seem to fall outside the scope of strict compliance and be subject only to voluntary codes of conduct, [..] leaving too much room for uncertainty and loopholes. [...] If one does not distinguish between these two senses of high-risk system—something is high risk if it fails to work vs. something is high risk if it is put to work—then one may end confusing the resilience that “good” AI systems must have, with the resistance that must be exerted towards the “bad” AI systems. [...] In other cases, the proposal is vague, such as when it comes to banning the use of AI systems intended to distort human behaviour, with probable physical or psychological harm. The intent is commendable, but it might risk banning even unproblematic AI systems if this approach were applied in a Draconian way. Finally, some expectations in the proposal seem too idealistic. [...] The new legislation may not improve but merely push out of the EU some risky AI R&D and its related ethical-legal problems, inviting companies to develop their products and services in other countries where legislation is absent, or less stringent, or not enforced, while the EU turns a wilful blind eye—or just inadequately enforces its legislation [...] Not respecting this atemporality (it should not matter when unethical steps were taken) would contradict the aterritoriality of the legislation. In this case, the recommendation is obvious: the EU must keep both eyes open and apply its ethical and legal requirements consistently and without hypocrisy, not just to the status quo, but also to the history of what comes from other places. Tratto da https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3873273 Personalmente l'analisi mi sembra ottima seppur non esaustiva nonché leggermente ingenua in alcuni passaggi (che non ho riportato qui). Definire le "AI" non sarebbe difficile (cambiando loro nome), ma è impossibile se si pretende di distinguerle dal resto del software. Si tratta infatti di software programmato statisticamente che riproduce uno degli infiniti pattern deducibili dai dati disponibili. Una volta in funzione è indistinguibile dal software programmato linguisticamente eccetto che per l'effettiva impossibilità di prevederne il comportamento negli infiniti corner-case non sufficientemente rappresentati dai dati. Comunque non ho idea di cosa abbia in mente Floridi quando parla di "AI systems intended to distort human behaviour" che potrebbero avere usi "unproblematic". La diffusione di qualsiasi automatismo (AI o meno) che possa distorcere il comportamento umano causando danni fisici, psicologici o sociali (Floridi non considera quest'ultima categoria) andrebbe semplicemente messa al bando. Giacomo

3 5

Documentario - The future of modern warfare. How technology is transforming conflicts - Deutsche Welle
by Diego.Latella June 26, 2021

June 26, 2021

Carissimi, Segnalo il filmato divulgativo "The future of modern warfare. How technology is transforming conflicts", suggeritomi da Guglielmo Tamburrini, che ringrazio. Il filmato tratta in modo semplice e chiaro aspetti quali il nesso fra cyber e nucleare, e le armi autonome. Accenna anche alle attivita' in seno alla CCW e alla Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, con spezzoni di interviste al ministro degli esteri tedesco. Il filmato e' della Deutsche Welle. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TmlBkW6ANsQ&feature=youtu.be Buon fine settimana Diego -- Dott. Diego Latella - Senior Researcher CNR/ISTI, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy (http:www.isti.cnr.it [1]) FM&&T Lab. (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it) CNR/GI-STS (http://gists.pi.cnr.it) https://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 I don't quite know whether it is especially computer science or its subdiscipline Artificial Intelligence that has such an enormous affection for euphemism. We speak so spectacularly and so readily of computer systems that understand, that see, decide, make judgments, and so on, without ourselves recognizing our own superficiality and immeasurable naivete with respect to these concepts. And, in the process of so speaking, we anesthetise our ability to evaluate the quality of our work and, what is more important, to identify and become conscious of its end use. […] One can't escape this state without asking, again and again: "What do I actually do? What is the final application and use of the products of my work?" and ultimately, "am I content or ashamed to have contributed to this use?" -- Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum ["Not without us", ACM SIGCAS 16(2-3) 2--7 - Aug. 1986] Links: ------ [1] http://www.isti.cnr.it

1 0