- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

referto informatica pubblica 2019
by Maria Margherita Salvadori Dec. 10, 2019

Dec. 10, 2019

Sul sito della Corte dei Conti Delibera n. 17/SSRRCO/REF/19 SEZIONI RIUNITE IN SEDE DI CONTROLLO 26/11/2019 Referto in materia di informatica pubblica 2019 Qui il link al documento https://www.corteconti.it/HOME/Documenti/DettaglioDocumenti?Id=ec0796f8-807… Cordiali saluti, Margherita Salvadori *Professore Diritto internazionale* *Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza* *Università di Torino*

6 14

Package tracking is coming to Google Search
by Luigi Scorca Dec. 10, 2019

Dec. 10, 2019

https://venturebeat-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/venturebeat.com/2019/12/05/p… Luigi

1 0

3rd ed. CEIPI Training on AI & IP
by GC F Dec. 10, 2019

Dec. 10, 2019

Cari tutti, Un breve annuncio per comunicarvi che le iscrizioni per la terza edizione del "CEIPI Advanced Training on Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property" sono aperte. Il corso si terrà a Strasburgo dal 23 al 25 Aprile Una bozza di programma e maggiori informazioni relative a iscrizione e logistica sono disponibili presso: http://www.ceipi.edu/en/training-seminars/artificial-intelligence-and-intel… Condividete se possibile. Con i saluti più cordiali, Giancarlo

1 0

A Telegram Mass Surveillance Bot in Python
by Giacomo Tesio Dec. 10, 2019

Dec. 10, 2019

https://github.com/paulpierre/informer Informer (TGInformer) is a bot library that allows you to masquerade as multiple REAL users on telegram and spy on 500+ Telegram channels per account. Details are logged to a MySQL database, a private Google Sheet and your own private channel for analysis. This is a functioning proof-of-concept project with known bugs. Feel free to fork, share and drop me a line. # Potential Business Applications - Sock puppeteering to overthrow a despotic regime - Brand monitoring and sentiment analysis - Shilling cryptocurrency at a moments notice for financial gain - Influencing sentiment on topical issues - Getting in on price action early - Running analysis of a telegram channel # Features - Run all your bots in the cloud while you sleep. Support for Google App Engine Flexible Environment and Docker - Write all notifications to private Google Sheet [...] - Stores meta information about sender of message, channel, number of participants in the channel - Uses REAL accounts avoiding bot detection, THIS IS NOT A TELEGRAM BOT but a real automated user account. This is an important distinction because the official bot API is limited and bots are often restricted in public channels. ____ La cosa più divertente è che questo giocattolino sia progettato per girare su Google App Engine e Docker e per integrarsi con Google Sheet. In pratica puoi sorvegliare i canali Telegram per Google. Gratis. Puro genio. Giacomo

1 0

AI Dungeon 2
by Giacomo Tesio Dec. 9, 2019

Dec. 9, 2019

Imagine an infinitely generated world that you could explore endlessly, continually finding entirely new content and adventures. What if you could also choose any action you can think of instead of being limited by the imagination of the developers who created the game? http://www.aidungeon.io/ To play the game locally, it is recommended that you have an nVidia GPU with 12 GB or more of memory, and CUDA installed. If you do not have such a GPU, each turn can take a couple of minutes or more for the game to compose its response. https://github.com/AIDungeon/AIDungeon Finalmente un uso appropriato dell'intelligenza artificiale. :-D Giacomo

1 0

Il modello Silicon Valley è in crisi per assenza di fantasia
by Giacomo Tesio Dec. 9, 2019

Dec. 9, 2019

Alla radice del problema c’è la mancanza di immaginazione. Per il venture capital il futuro è per definizione imprevedibile, è una singularity di cui non si può sapere niente. La dottrina di disruptive innovation che sta al cuore del sistema predica che le innovazioni radicali creeranno i loro mercati [...] Ma più che un fiorire di idee radicalmente nuove [...] il risultato è stato una standardizzazione dell’innovazione in forma di contributi marginali a una società di consumo novecentesca ormai senza futuro: intelligenza artificiale per selezionare le playlist via Alexa o app che ti permettono di ordinare la pizza senza chiamare la pizzeria sotto casa. Se il modello Silicon Valley si sta esaurendo è soprattutto per questo motivo, manca un’idea di che tipo di mondo costruire con le tecnologie digitali, un’idea di un futuro diversa dal presente. Inizia su https://www.ilfoglio.it/tecnologia/2019/12/06/news/il-modello-silicon-valle… Giacomo

1 0

Considerazioni
by Alfredo Bregni Dec. 9, 2019

Dec. 9, 2019

Mi è stato chiesto di postare le considerazioni che seguono sul sito nexa: --------------- La soluzione a molti problemi -- non tutti purtroppo (come ad esempio la guerra) -- legati alla tecnica / tecnologia è paradossalmente semplice: - Inversione dell'onere della prova; - Costituzione obbligatoria di fondo rischi per danni. Forse lo spiego meglio in una mia ipotesi di revisione dei Principi Fondamentali della Costituzione, ...perché la cosa va portata a quel livello (riporto solo alcuni articoli scelti ad hoc; le modifiche rispetto al testo vigente sono evidenziate con "*") Art. 1 L'Italia è una Repubblica democratica, fondata sul lavoro, *la libertà di pensiero e la protezione dei deboli.* La sovranità appartiene al popolo, che la esercita nelle forme e nei limiti della Costituzione. Art. 3 Tutti i cittadini hanno pari dignità sociale **, senza distinzione di sesso, di razza, di lingua, di religione, di opinioni politiche, di condizioni personali e sociali. È compito della Repubblica rimuovere gli ostacoli di ordine economico e sociale, che, limitando di fatto la libertà e l'eguaglianza dei cittadini, impediscono il pieno sviluppo della persona umana e l'effettiva partecipazione di tutti i lavoratori all'organizzazione politica, economica e sociale del Paese. *La legge, di principio uguale per tutti, protegge la parte debole.* Art. 4 La Repubblica riconosce a tutti i cittadini il diritto al lavoro e promuove le condizioni che rendano effettivo questo diritto. Ogni cittadino ha il dovere di svolgere, secondo le proprie possibilità e la propria scelta, un'attività o una funzione che concorra al progresso materiale o spirituale della società. *Al lavoratore con contratto di lavoro precario va riconosciuto un corrispettivo maggiorato in proporzione alle minori tutele che gli vengono riconosciute.* Art. 9 La Repubblica promuove lo sviluppo della cultura e la ricerca scientifica e tecnica. *La ricerca scientifica e tecnica è libera in assoluto. Vincoli possono essere posti solo alle sue applicazioni (economiche, militari, o di altro tipo).* *La Repubblica* tutela *la salute dei propri cittadini,* il paesaggio e il patrimonio storico e artistico della Nazione. *A tal fine, le applicazioni economiche delle innovazioni tecnico-scientifiche, ancorché omologate in base alle leggi vigenti, sono ritenute incondizionatamente responsabili nei confronti dei cittadini e del patrimonio pubblico, intesi come parte debole di un'eventuale contesa giuridica, e devono a tal fine predisporre un fondo rischi a copertura di eventuali danni rilevati in futuro.* [ Commento: si tratta di passare da presunzione di innocenza a presunzione di colpevolezza, considerato che chi porta applicazioni sul mercato deve aver verificato molto bene che non siano nocive, e quindi ha tutti gli elementi in mano per provare la propria eventuale innocenza. ] --------------- Saluti, Alfredo Bregni

9 11

Reminder | 125° Mercoledì di Nexa | 11 Dicembre 2019
by Nexa Media Dec. 9, 2019

Dec. 9, 2019

Gentilissimi, vi ricordiamo che mercoledì 11 dicembre, dalle ore 18.00 alle ore 20.00, si svolgerà il 125° Mercoledì di Nexa, con un incontro dal titolo: *Il progetto dell'oggetto tecnico e il progetto dello spazio terrestre* Ospiti:/Alessandro Armando/ (/Professore al Politecnico di Torino/) e /Giovanni Durbiano/ (/Professore //al Politecnico di Torino/). Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili all’indirizzo:https://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi-125 <https://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi-125> A conclusione dell'incontro, trattandosi dell'ultimo incontro pubblico dell'anno solare, si farà il consueto brindisi di fine anno. Vi aspettiamo numerosi! Cordiali saluti, -- Anita Botta Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino – DAUIN Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino _web:_ https://nexa.polito.it/ _mail:_anita.botta@polito.it <mailto:anita.botta@polito.it> tel: 011 090 7219

1 0

SURVEILLANCE GIANTS:, HOW THE BUSINESS MODEL OF GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK, THREATENS HUMAN RIGHTS
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 8, 2019

Dec. 8, 2019

Il Rapporto Amnesty International accoglie il messaggio della Zuboff. <https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/POL3014042019ENGLISH.PDF> The internet has revolutionised our world on a scale not seen since the invention of electricity. Over half of the world’s population now relies on the web to read the news, message a loved one, find a job, or seek answers to an urgent question. It has opened social and economic opportunities at a scale and speed that few imagined fifty years ago. Recognising this shift, it is now firmly acknowledged that access to the internet is vital to enable the enjoyment of human rights. For more than 4 billion people, the internet has become central to how they communicate, learn, participate in the economy, and organise socially and politically. Yet when these billions participate in life online, most of them rely heavily on the services of just two corporations. Two companies control the primary channels that people rely on to engage with the internet. They provide services so integral that it is difficult to imagine the internet without them. Facebook is the world’s dominant social media company. If you combine users of its social platform, its messenger services, WhatsApp and Messenger, and applications such as Instagram, a third of humans on Earth use a Facebook-owned service every day. Facebook sets terms for much of human connection in the digital age. A second company, Google, occupies an even larger share of the online world. Search engines are a crucial source of information; Google accounts for around ninety percent of global search engine use. Its browser, Chrome, is the world’s dominant web browser. Its video platform, YouTube, is the world’s second largest search engine as well as the world’s largest video platform. Google’s mobile operating system, Android, underpins the vast majority of the world’s smartphones. Android’s dominance is particularly important because smartphones have replaced the desktop computer as the primary way people access and use the internet. Smartphones reveal information about us beyond our online browsing habits—such as our physical travel patterns and our location. They often contain thousands of intimate emails and text messages, photographs, contacts, and calendar entries. Google and Facebook have helped to connect the world and provided crucial services to billions. To participate meaningfully in today’s economy and society, and to realise their human rights, people rely on access to the internet—and the tools Google and Facebook offer. But despite the real value of the services they provide, Google and Facebook’s platforms come at a systemic cost. The companies’ surveillance-based business model forces people to make a Faustian bargain, whereby they are only able to enjoy their human rights online by submitting to a system predicated on human rights abuse. Firstly, an assault on the right to privacy on an unprecedented scale, and then a series of knock-on effects that pose a serious risk to a range of other rights, from freedom of expression and opinion, to freedom of thought and the right to non-discrimination. SURVEILLANCE GIANTS: HOW THE BUSINESS MODEL OF GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK THREATENS HUMAN RIGHTS Amnesty International 5This isn’t the internet people signed up for. When Google and Facebook were first starting out two decades ago, both companies had radically different business models that did not depend on ubiquitous surveillance. The gradual erosion of privacy at the hands of Google and Facebook is a direct result of the companies establishing dominant market power and control over the global “public square”. In Chapter 1, ‘the Business of Surveillance’, this report sets out how the surveillance-based business model works: Google and Facebook offer services to billions of people without asking them to pay a financial fee. Instead, citizens pay for the services with their intimate personal data. After collecting this data, Google and Facebook use it to analyse people, aggregate them into groups, and to make predictions about their interests, characteristics, and ultimately behaviour - primarily so they can use these insights to generate advertising revenue. This surveillance machinery reaches well beyond the Google search bar or the Facebook platform itself. People are tracked across the web, through the apps on their phones, and in the physical world as well, as they go about their day-to-day affairs. These two companies collect extensive data on what we search; where we go; who we talk to; what we say; what we read; and, through the analysis made possible by computing advances, have the power to infer what our moods, ethnicities, sexual orientation, political opinions, and vulnerabilities may be. Some of these categories—including characteristics protected under human rights law—are made available to others for the purpose of targeting internet users with advertisements and other information. In Chapter 2, ‘Assault on Privacy’, we set out how this ubiquitous surveillance has undermined the very essence of the right to privacy. Not only does it represent an intrusion into billions of people’s private lives that can never be necessary or proportionate, but the companies have conditioned access to their services on “consenting” to processing and sharing of their personal data for marketing and advertising, directly countering the right to decide when and how our personal data can be shared with others. Finally, the companies’ use of algorithmic systems to create and infer detailed profiles on people interferes with our ability to shape our own identities within a private sphere. Advertisers were the original beneficiaries of these insights, but once created, the companies’ data vaults served as an irresistible temptation for governments as well. This is for a simple reason: Google and Facebook achieved a degree of data extraction from their billions of users that would have been intolerable had governments carried it out directly. Both companies have stood up to states’ efforts to obtain information on their users; nevertheless, the opportunity to access such data has created a powerful disincentive for governments to regulate corporate surveillance. The abuse of privacy that is core to Facebook and Google’s surveillance-based business model is starkly demonstrated by the companies’ long history of privacy scandals. Despite the companies’ assurances over their commitment to privacy, it is difficult not to see these numerous privacy infringements as part of the normal functioning of their business, rather than aberrations. In Chapter 3, ‘Data Analytics at Scale: Human Rights Risks Beyond Privacy’, we look at how Google and Facebook’s platforms rely not only on extracting vast amounts of people’s data, but on drawing further insight and information from that data using sophisticated algorithmic systems. These systems are designed to find the best way to achieve outcomes in the companies’ interests, including finely- tuned ad targeting and delivery, and behavioural nudges that keep people engaged on the platforms. As a result, people’s data, once aggregated, boomerangs back on them in a host of unforeseen ways. These algorithmic systems have been shown to have a range of knock-on effects that pose a serious threat to people’s rights, including freedom of expression and opinion, freedom of thought, and the right to equality and non-discrimination. These risks are greatly heightened by the size and reach of Google and Facebook’s platforms, enabling human rights harm at a population scale. Moreover, SURVEILLANCE GIANTS: HOW THE BUSINESS MODEL OF GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK THREATENS HUMAN RIGHTS Amnesty International 6systems that rely on complex data analytics can be opaque even to computer scientists, let alone the billions of people whose data is being processed. The Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which data from 87 million people’s Facebook profiles were harvested and used to micro-target and manipulate people for political campaigning purposes, opened the world’s eyes to the capabilities such platforms possess to influence people at scale – and the risk that they could be abused by other actors. However, although shocking, the incident was the tip of the iceberg, stemming from the very same model of data extraction and analysis inherent to both Facebook and Google’s business. Finally, in Chapter 4, ‘Concentration of Power Obstructs Accountability’, we show how vast data reserves and powerful computational capabilities have made Google and Facebook two of the most valuable and powerful companies in the world today. Google’s market capitalization is more than twice the GDP of Ireland (both companies’ European headquarters); Facebook’s is larger by a third. The companies’ business model has helped concentrate their power, including financial clout, political influence, and the ability to shape the digital experience of billions of people, leading to an unprecedented asymmetry of knowledge between the companies and internet users – as scholar Shoshana Zuboff states “They know everything about us; we know almost nothing about them.” This concentrated power goes hand in hand with the human rights impacts of the business model and has created an accountability gap in which it is difficult for governments to hold the companies to account, or for individuals who are affected to access justice. Governments have an obligation to protect people from human rights abuses by corporations. But for the past two decades, technology companies have been largely left to self-regulate – in 2013, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt described the online world as “the world’s largest ungoverned space”. However, regulators and national authorities across various jurisdictions have begun to take a more confrontational approach to the concentrated power of Google and Facebook—investigating the companies for competition violations, issuing fines for infringing Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), or introducing new tax regimes for big technology companies. Businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights in the context of their business operations that requires them to carry out “human rights due diligence” to identify and address their human rights impacts. Google and Facebook have established policies and processes to address their impacts on privacy and freedom of expression – but evidently, given that their surveillance-based business model undermines the very essence of the right to privacy and poses a serious risk to a range of other rights, the companies are not taking a holistic approach, nor are they questioning whether their current business models themselves can be compliant with their responsibility to respect human rights. Amnesty International gave both Google and Facebook an opportunity to respond to the findings of this report in advance of publication. Facebook’s letter in response is appended in the annex below. Amnesty International had a conversation with senior Google staff, who subsequently provided information around its relevant policies and practices. Both responses are incorporated throughout the report. Ultimately, it is now evident that the era of self-regulation in the tech sector is coming to an end: further state-based regulation will be necessary, but it is vital that whatever form future regulation of the technology sector takes, governments follow a human rights-based approach. In the short-term, there is an immediate need for stronger enforcement of existing regulation. Governments must take positive steps to reduce the harms of the surveillance-based business model—to adopt digital public policies that have the objective of universal access and enjoyment of human rights at their core, to reduce or eliminate pervasive private surveillance, and to enact reforms, including structural ones, sufficient to restore confidence and trust in the internet.

1 0

Moscow Cops Sell Access to City CCTV, Facial Recognition Data
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 8, 2019

Dec. 8, 2019

La notizia è diffusa da MBK Media, outlet anti-Putin di Mikhail Khodorkovsky e ripresa in inglese dall'aggregatore lituano Meduza.io <https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/moscow-cops-sell-access-to-c…> Anyone with a little money can buy access to Moscow's surveillance system of tens of thousands of cameras along and check footage stored over the previous five days. Sellers on forums and messenger groups that trade illegal data also provide facial recognition lookup services. City-wide surveillance To ensure safety in the city, there are over 175,000 CCTV cameras in Moscow, most of them installed at entrances and more than 4,000 present in crowded places. Back in 2017, the mayor's office in Moscow stated that facial recognition technology integrated with Russia's police databases had been activated and it was pulling data from 3,000 cameras. The plan was to link the rest of the video surveillance to the facial recognition system. The city's website says that the video surveillance system can be accessed by "employees of federal government bodies, the Moscow Mayor and their authorized officials, law enforcement and executive authorities." "Restricted" access Investigative media outlet MBKh Media found that access to this technology and the live streams is being sold on underground forums and chat rooms. Andrey Kaganskikh, the journalist that did the investigation says that the sellers are law enforcement individuals as well as government bureaucrats that can log into the Integrated Center for Data Processing and Storage (YTKD), the very system that keeps the data from cameras in Moscow. Whoever wants to check the live stream from a camera receives a unique link to the City CCTV System that connects to all public cameras in Moscow. The URL works for five days, Kaganskikh says. This is the same period mentioned on the city's CCTV section for storing footage from crowded places, shops, and courtyards. Data from educational organizations is saved for 30 days. Furthermore, government officials or police officers sell their login credentials to the system to provide unlimited access to all cameras. The price of admission is 30,000 rubles ($470), according to Kaganskikh. To test the facial recognition attributes, the investigator provided a photo of him to a seller. The search returned 238 images of people (male and female) with a similar look from 140 cameras, along with a list of addresses and times they were caught on camera. "We managed to find the cameras from the file at the indicated addresses - their angles coincided with the pictures, the camera indices and the camera indices from the open registry also coincided" - Andrey Kaganskikh Among the metadata available for each photo there was a label indicating if the person was regularly seen by that camera or if they were spotted for the first time. As for the accuracy of the results, none of the photos returned were of the investigator. However, the facial features were similar to the input and the system assessed a similarity of 67%. Kaganskikh says in a video report that the poor results may be explained by the limited number of cameras connected to the face recognition algorithm. The investigator says that the sellers he'd been in contact with told him that the police have free access to this technology. No justification, such as a warrant for a legal investigation, is required to run a search. Finding the sellers is not difficult, either. Apparently, the forums are indexed by search engines, so their content is easy to discover. This type of access is popular with private detectives, scammers, or individuals that trade surveillance services.

2 1