Discover more from Lukasz Olejnik on Cyber, Privacy and Tech Policy Critique
TechLetters #123 - US debating how China's cyberwar could look like. Russia blames Pentagon for cyberattacks. Russian campaign found in wild. TikTok impacts on mental abilities.
US starts debating how Chinese cyberattacks could look like prior to invasion of Taiwan. Similar discussions predated Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Russia says that “Pentagon, NATO states behind massive cyberattacks from Ukraine against Russia”. They even try to link it to “Cyber army of Ukraine” which actually undermines the seriousness of these “accusations” on merit grounds. Yeah, right.
Ongoing Russian intelligence campaign identified in wild. Targeted NATO, EU, Africa countries. Three cyber tools recovered, analysed, and burned.
Not hacking water sanitation systems. Remember the story about the alleged hacking of water systems? It… never happened. “the employee, “banging on his keyboard,” accidentally caused the increased lye concentration”. There was also never any danger (even if hacking would occur). However, the loud event helped in cybersecurity budgeting, getting more funds. So ultimately what, profit?
EDPB investigation of ChatGPT. European Data Protection Board set up a working group to determine whether ChatGPT's "artificial intelligence" tool respects data protection law. No imminent decision to be delivered, yet.
TikTok negatively impacts on mental abilities. “TikTok condition significantly degraded the users' performance … combination of short videos and rapid context-switching impairs intention recall and execution”. Negative impact on short-term memory, disrupting cognitive abilities.
China wants “socialist values” in its AI. China regulating generative AI. "Content generated by generative artificial intelligence should embody core socialist values and must not contain any content that subverts state power". Providers become legally liable for generated content.
In case you feel it's worth it to forward this content further:
If you’d like to share: