ESSAY: What if AI waged war? The Fatal Flaw <https://jessicaanneeise.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/what-if-ai-waged-war_eise_creative-writing.pdf >, by Jessica Eise (Short Story)
On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:23 AM Konrads Smelkovs < [email protected]> wrote: > Big shame most of list don’t read In Russian else I would recommend works > by Victor Pelevin who in his fiction describes sharply a variety of ways > how to screw up a society using weaponised narratives. > > In one of his works - “Heavenly sutras of Al-EfesBee” he describes AI > drones who must produce a small talk show using virtual hosts who agnosise > over the drone strike justifying it and disagreeing - all to placate public > at home. Al-EfEsbee then proceeds to write paradoxical statements on the > battlefield > In large type which are machine read and that crashes the advanced, > agonising AI of the drone. > > This story tells us two things: > - Advanced AI is unexplainable and can act in ways that you don’t > anticipate > - China can do full auto drones because they don’t have to explain > anything to anyone back at home. > > > On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 08:59, Dave Aitel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A decade or so ago I got pneumonia and then tried to give a talk about why >> attackers tend to win >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1zSlUBfSUg&list=PLIrw3NtUvbxPffyw9LvE-NnWwxPJarF2V&index=1> >> at cyber stuff. The usual answer you will hear, the *RSAC* answer, if >> you will, is total BS. If someone says "Attackers only need to get in once, >> but defenders need to succeed every time!" then they are officially a moron >> and it's ok to sell them blinky-light systems which protect them from APTs >> or whatever, maybe after discussing some ballgame scores with them first >> that have all the narrative joy of a set of random numbers, but I wouldn't >> take their advice on information security. >> >> But the sign of a truly great attack in our space is often that you could >> write it in every blog and newspaper in the land as the top headline, and >> defenders would still not be able to adjust to it because they are so >> mentally invested in the alternative. CRYPTO-AG is an example of this, as >> were the original ENIGMA and PURPLE breaks during WWII. >> >> But my favorite one is maybe "patching". People will take a remotely >> accessible system that has a newly published RCE, one they have basically >> no telemetry on, and then patch that bad boy up and go on with their lives >> as long as it doesn't have some sort of malware that changes the login >> screen. Oh lordy the scripts to find out if your Citrix VPN was popped last >> month...just comedic genius. >> >> My second favorite might be WAFs. We know they don't WORK, but they KINDA >> WORK sometimes and are easy to write metrics around and maybe that's enough >> to justify their existence even though they also introduce security flaws >> of their own? >> >> My third favorite one is SOCs with humans in them. You can, quite >> literally, say "Hey, attackers are always going to move faster than you >> because they are going to invest in automation, which is clearly the >> answer..." but five thousand blogs on "Threat Hunting" later, here we are. >> I mean, I know Jason Healey and Dmitri Alperovitch argued recently that >> offensive innovations are in actuality quite limited >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgr4A1feV5Y&t=33s>, but it's probably >> wisest to assume that the offensive community you see is just the foot of >> the mountain range, and that above the permafrost is an entire cloud city >> of strange and glorious creatures, working on telnetd remotes >> <https://appgateresearch.blogspot.com/?m=1>. >> >> This brings us to a few national-level policies which are just as funny. >> When you listen to defense department innovators >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA0epN0L1fc&t=9s> talk about automation >> on the battlefield they are super careful to point out that a "human will >> always be in the loop for any use of force". But of course, any of our >> adversaries (c.f. China) who has pushed their AI to be fully automated on >> the battlefield will have a massive advantage over anyone who has not. They >> are either lying and they know it, or, MORE HILARIOUSLY don't even know it. >> >> The same is true about the Air Force's bizarre reaction to Elon Musk this >> week pointing out that obviously fully automated drones are the >> near-future. The air force, predictably, pushed back >> <https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/04/air-force-generals-elon-musk-fighter-jet-era-isnt-over-yet.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1583360352>. >> Their paychecks depend on a system full of human butts in expensive >> airframes, as useless in the wars they were designed for as a human >> querying a time-series database for an IoC. >> >> In other words, the reason attackers win has not changed, and maybe never >> will. >> -dave >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dailydave mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave >> > -- > > -K > _______________________________________________ > Dailydave mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave >
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list [email protected] https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
