Coordinated Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.07039v2
• Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 16:08:34 GMT
• Title: Coordinated Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities
• Authors: Sven Cattell, Avijit Ghosh, Lucie-Aimée Kaffee,
• Abstract summary: Algorithmic flaws in machine learning (ML) models present distinct challenges compared to traditional software vulnerabilities. To address this gap, we propose the implementation of a dedicated Coordinated Flaw Disclosure framework. This paper delves into the historical landscape of disclosures in ML, encompassing the ad hoc reporting of harms and the emergence of participatory auditing.
• Score: 1.3225694028747144
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Harm reporting in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) currently operates on an ad hoc basis, lacking a structured process for disclosing or addressing algorithmic flaws. In contrast, the Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) ethos and ecosystem play a pivotal role in software security and transparency. Globally, there are ongoing efforts to establish frameworks that promote transparency and collaboration in addressing AI-related issues, though challenges persist. Algorithmic flaws in machine learning (ML) models present distinct challenges compared to traditional software vulnerabilities, warranting a specialized approach. To address this gap, we propose the implementation of a dedicated Coordinated Flaw Disclosure (CFD) framework tailored to the intricacies of machine learning and artificial intelligence issues. This paper delves into the historical landscape of disclosures in ML, encompassing the ad hoc reporting of harms and the emergence of participatory auditing. By juxtaposing these practices with the well-established disclosure norms in cybersecurity, we argue that the broader adoption of CFD has the potential to enhance public trust through transparent processes that carefully balance the interests of both organizations and the community.

Related papers

• Rethinking Data Protection in the (Generative) Artificial Intelligence Era [115.71019708491386]
  We propose a four-level taxonomy that captures the diverse protection needs arising in modern (generative) AI models and systems.<n>Our framework offers a structured understanding of the trade-offs between data utility and control, spanning the entire AI pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T02:45:51Z)
• Mitigating Cyber Risk in the Age of Open-Weight LLMs: Policy Gaps and Technical Realities [0.0]
  Open-weight general-purpose AI (GPAI) models offer significant benefits but also introduce substantial cybersecurity risks.<n>This paper analyzes the specific threats -- including accelerated malware development and enhanced social engineering -- magnified by open-weight AI release.<n>We propose a path forward focusing on evaluating and controlling specific high-risk capabilities rather than entire models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-21T11:35:52Z)
• Securing the Future of IVR: AI-Driven Innovation with Agile Security, Data Regulation, and Ethical AI Integration [0.0]
  This paper analyzes the evolution of interfaces from static code-based designs to adaptive AI-driven systems.<n>We propose a practical framework that embeds agile security principles, compliance with global data legislation, and user-centric ethics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T18:03:02Z)
• A Framework for Cryptographic Verifiability of End-to-End AI Pipelines [0.8075866265341175]
  We propose a framework for complete verifiable AI pipelines, identifying key components and analyzing existing cryptographic approaches. This framework could be used to combat misinformation by providing cryptographic proofs alongside AI-generated assets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-28T16:20:57Z)
• In-House Evaluation Is Not Enough: Towards Robust Third-Party Flaw Disclosure for General-Purpose AI [93.33036653316591]
  We call for three interventions to advance system safety. First, we propose using standardized AI flaw reports and rules of engagement for researchers. Second, we propose GPAI system providers adopt broadly-scoped flaw disclosure programs. Third, we advocate for the development of improved infrastructure to coordinate distribution of flaw reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T05:09:46Z)
• Position: A taxonomy for reporting and describing AI security incidents [57.98317583163334]
  We argue that specific are required to describe and report security incidents of AI systems. Existing frameworks for either non-AI security or generic AI safety incident reporting are insufficient to capture the specific properties of AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:50:26Z)
• Establishing Minimum Elements for Effective Vulnerability Management in AI Software [4.067778725390327]
  This paper discusses the minimum elements for AI vulnerability management and the establishment of an Artificial Intelligence Vulnerability Database (AIVD) It presents standardized formats and protocols for disclosing, analyzing, cataloging, and documenting AI vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-18T06:22:20Z)
• Reclaiming "Open AI" -- AI Model Serving Can Be Open Access, Yet Monetizable and Loyal [39.63122342758896]
  The rapid rise of AI has split model serving between open-weight distribution and opaque API-based approaches.<n>This position paper introduces, rigorously formulates, and champions the Open-access, Monetizable, and Loyal (OML) paradigm for AI model serving.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-01T18:46:03Z)
• Artificial Intelligence as the New Hacker: Developing Agents for Offensive Security [0.0]
  This paper explores the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into offensive cybersecurity. It develops an autonomous AI agent, ReaperAI, designed to simulate and execute cyberattacks. ReaperAI demonstrates the potential to identify, exploit, and analyze security vulnerabilities autonomously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T18:15:12Z)
• Emergent Explainability: Adding a causal chain to neural network inference [0.0]
  This position paper presents a theoretical framework for enhancing explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) through emergent communication (EmCom) We explore the novel integration of EmCom into AI systems, offering a paradigm shift from conventional associative relationships between inputs and outputs to a more nuanced, causal interpretation. The paper discusses the theoretical underpinnings of this approach, its potential broad applications, and its alignment with the growing need for responsible and transparent AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T02:28:39Z)
• Deepfakes, Misinformation, and Disinformation in the Era of Frontier AI, Generative AI, and Large AI Models [7.835719708227145]
  Deepfakes and the spread of m/disinformation have emerged as formidable threats to the integrity of information ecosystems worldwide. We highlight the mechanisms through which generative AI based on large models (LM-based GenAI) craft seemingly convincing yet fabricated contents. We introduce an integrated framework that combines advanced detection algorithms, cross-platform collaboration, and policy-driven initiatives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T06:47:58Z)
• Towards a Responsible AI Metrics Catalogue: A Collection of Metrics for AI Accountability [28.67753149592534]
  This study bridges the accountability gap by introducing our effort towards a comprehensive metrics catalogue. Our catalogue delineates process metrics that underpin procedural integrity, resource metrics that provide necessary tools and frameworks, and product metrics that reflect the outputs of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-22T04:43:16Z)
• Federated Learning-Empowered AI-Generated Content in Wireless Networks [58.48381827268331]
  Federated learning (FL) can be leveraged to improve learning efficiency and achieve privacy protection for AIGC. We present FL-based techniques for empowering AIGC, and aim to enable users to generate diverse, personalized, and high-quality content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-14T04:13:11Z)
• AI Maintenance: A Robustness Perspective [91.28724422822003]
  We introduce highlighted robustness challenges in the AI lifecycle and motivate AI maintenance by making analogies to car maintenance. We propose an AI model inspection framework to detect and mitigate robustness risks. Our proposal for AI maintenance facilitates robustness assessment, status tracking, risk scanning, model hardening, and regulation throughout the AI lifecycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-08T15:02:38Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)
• Trustworthy AI [75.99046162669997]
  Brittleness to minor adversarial changes in the input data, ability to explain the decisions, address the bias in their training data, are some of the most prominent limitations. We propose the tutorial on Trustworthy AI to address six critical issues in enhancing user and public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-02T20:04:18Z)
• Trustworthy AI Inference Systems: An Industry Research View [58.000323504158054]
  We provide an industry research view for approaching the design, deployment, and operation of trustworthy AI inference systems. We highlight opportunities and challenges in AI systems using trusted execution environments. We outline areas of further development that require the global collective attention of industry, academia, and government researchers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-10T23:05:55Z)
• Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims [59.64274607533249]
  AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.