Incorporating AI Incident Reporting into Telecommunications Law and Policy: Insights from India

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.09508v1
• Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 14:50:41 GMT
• Title: Incorporating AI Incident Reporting into Telecommunications Law and Policy: Insights from India
• Authors: Avinash Agarwal, Manisha J. Nene,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces a precise definition and a detailed typology of telecommunications AI incidents.<n>It argues for their recognition as a distinct regulatory concern.<n>The paper proposes policy recommendations centered on integrating AI incident reporting into India's existing telecom governance.
• Score: 0.6875312133832078
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into telecommunications infrastructure introduces novel risks, such as algorithmic bias and unpredictable system behavior, that fall outside the scope of traditional cybersecurity and data protection frameworks. This paper introduces a precise definition and a detailed typology of telecommunications AI incidents, establishing them as a distinct category of risk that extends beyond conventional cybersecurity and data protection breaches. It argues for their recognition as a distinct regulatory concern. Using India as a case study for jurisdictions that lack a horizontal AI law, the paper analyzes the country's key digital regulations. The analysis reveals that India's existing legal instruments, including the Telecommunications Act, 2023, the CERT-In Rules, and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, focus on cybersecurity and data breaches, creating a significant regulatory gap for AI-specific operational incidents, such as performance degradation and algorithmic bias. The paper also examines structural barriers to disclosure and the limitations of existing AI incident repositories. Based on these findings, the paper proposes targeted policy recommendations centered on integrating AI incident reporting into India's existing telecom governance. Key proposals include mandating reporting for high-risk AI failures, designating an existing government body as a nodal agency to manage incident data, and developing standardized reporting frameworks. These recommendations aim to enhance regulatory clarity and strengthen long-term resilience, offering a pragmatic and replicable blueprint for other nations seeking to govern AI risks within their existing sectoral frameworks.

Related papers

• Cybercrime and Computer Forensics in Epoch of Artificial Intelligence in India [0.0]
  This study scrutinizes the AI "dual-use" dilemma, functioning as both a cyber-threat vector and forensic automation mechanism.<n>While Machine Learning offers high accuracy in pattern recognition, it introduces vulnerabilities regarding data poisoning and algorithmic bias.<n>Findings highlight a critical tension between the Act's data minimization principles and forensic data retention requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-16T19:39:22Z)
• AI Regulation in Telecommunications: A Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Study [0.6117371161379207]
  This paper conducts a comparative legal study of policy instruments across ten countries.<n>It examines how telecom, cybersecurity, data protection, and AI laws approach AI-related risks in infrastructure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T08:30:12Z)
• International AI Safety Report 2025: Second Key Update: Technical Safeguards and Risk Management [115.92752850425272]
  Second update to the 2025 International AI Safety Report assesses new developments in general-purpose AI risk management over the past year.<n> examines how researchers, public institutions, and AI developers are approaching risk management for general-purpose AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-25T03:12:56Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• AI threats to national security can be countered through an incident regime [55.2480439325792]
  We propose a legally mandated post-deployment AI incident regime that aims to counter potential national security threats from AI systems.<n>Our proposed AI incident regime is split into three phases. The first phase revolves around a novel operationalization of what counts as an 'AI incident'<n>The second and third phases spell out that AI providers should notify a government agency about incidents, and that the government agency should be involved in amending AI providers' security and safety procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T17:51:50Z)
• 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.<n>First, we propose using standardized AI flaw reports and rules of engagement for researchers.<n>Second, we propose GPAI system providers adopt broadly-scoped flaw disclosure programs.<n>Third, we advocate for the development of improved infrastructure to coordinate distribution of flaw reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T05:09:46Z)
• Standardised schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases in critical digital infrastructure [2.209921757303168]
  The rapid deployment of Artificial Intelligence in critical digital infrastructure introduces significant risks.<n>Existing databases lack the granularity as well as the standardized structure required for consistent data collection and analysis.<n>This work proposes a standardized schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases, enabling detailed and structured documentation of AI incidents across sectors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T15:59:01Z)
• Securing the AI Frontier: Urgent Ethical and Regulatory Imperatives for AI-Driven Cybersecurity [0.0]
  This paper critically examines the evolving ethical and regulatory challenges posed by the integration of artificial intelligence in cybersecurity.<n>We trace the historical development of AI regulation, highlighting major milestones from theoretical discussions in the 1940s to the implementation of recent global frameworks such as the European Union AI Act.<n>Ethical concerns such as bias, transparency, accountability, privacy, and human oversight are explored in depth, along with their implications for AI-driven cybersecurity systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T18:17:37Z)
• Position: Mind the Gap-the Growing Disconnect Between Established Vulnerability Disclosure and AI Security [56.219994752894294]
  We argue that adapting existing processes for AI security reporting is doomed to fail due to fundamental shortcomings for the distinctive characteristics of AI systems.<n>Based on our proposal to address these shortcomings, we discuss an approach to AI security reporting and how the new AI paradigm, AI agents, will further reinforce the need for specialized AI security incident reporting advancements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:50:26Z)
• Coordinated Flaw Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities [1.3225694028747144]
  We propose a Coordinated Flaw Disclosure framework tailored to the complexities of machine learning (ML) issues. Our framework introduces innovations such as extended model cards, dynamic scope expansion, an independent adjudication panel, and an automated verification process. We argue that CFD could significantly enhance public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-10T20:39:04Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)

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.