Blockchain, cryptocurrencies, NFTs and smart contracts are all the rage. They promise (yet another) revolution. They attract public and private investment. They allow those who have embraced them to make fortunes and lose everything. They are also, however, the umpteenth step towards electronic slavery masquerading as a dream of freedom. Thanks to these technologies – but more generally to how the IT market works – we transfer control over the economic and intellectual value we create with our work and thought efforts to private operators. In exchange for what? by Andrea Monti – Initially published in Italian by Strategikon – an Italian Tech Blog. Continue reading “Stay away from blockchain and cryptocurrencies, says nerd”
by Andrea Monti – originally published in Italian by Infosec.News
Routers … are affected by a severe vulnerability that makes it possible, without any artifice or hack, to obtain the router’s access password.
Therefore, it is possible to block the operation of the device, making services inaccessible and, in some cases, accessing the user’s internal network. It would make it possible to intercept e-mails and, more generally, the information contained therein— all without the user’s knowledge. We wonder … how is it possible that equipment with such vulnerabilities to the privacy of citizens and the activities of companies can be placed on the market without any control, without any information or caution, without any assumption of responsibility on the part of manufacturers and distributors and without any protection for defenceless (and unsuspecting) users? Continue reading “The Zyxel’s Firewall Bug. Twenty Years Passed Invain”
Operating systems and software manage the usability of machines by Andrea Monti – Originally published in Italian by Infosec.News
Adobe announces the end of Flash Player and that it will block content based on this standard, which is considered inherently unsafe and the subject of constant security updates.
It is a subject for another article to investigate why it was possible to allow such software (and those of other manufacturers) to burden and weaken computers around the world . For the time being, we are interested in the relationship between obsolescence management, licensing, the ‘ownership’ of a computer (or a smartphone or a tablet, or – when the IoT will, unfortunately, become a reality – any household appliance).
In short: buying a computer does not mean becoming its owner, because its usability depends on the strategies of operating systems and software’s producers to keep it running. The subject is certainly not new (Richard Stallman wrote about it at the dawn of free software), but today it has reached worrying dimensions.Continue reading “Who owns your computer, and more importantly, can you trust it?”
What do the anti-American, allegedly-Chinese espionage actions have in common with the death in Germany of a woman who would not receive prompt treatment because a ransomware attack paralysed the German hospital where her ambulance was heading? The analysis of Andrea Monti, adjunct professor of law and order and public security law, University of Chieti-Pescara – published initially in Italian by Formiche.net
Continue reading “Networks and national security. What software houses can do according to Prof. Monti”
An article by Simone Cosimi on Repubblica.it re-sings the old refrain of “the computer is stronger than a human playing chess” in the variant “Go” (which is a Chinese game, but that the journalist qualifies with Japanese terms about a Korean player, despite being the game known and played for centuries in Japan and Korea).
A semantic rigour aside, that a computer – or better, a software, can be “stronger” than a human being – is hardly a news. Everyone who plays chess knows that, having honed their skills with the many programs, some really excellent, available to the general public. As it is hardly a news the fact that the software is so advanced as to put in difficulty professionals or even champions.
But from here, to say – or to suggest – that we are dealing with a system that is more “intelligent” than Man, there is a huge gap. It would be like saying that since a mechanical arm makes perfect welds that no human being can replicate, it should be considered as able to “think”.
The problem, here, is the absence – or rather the disappearance – of the “neuter” genre in the language, because the trick of the narrative about “artificial” intelligence is in the words. Software does neither “learn” or “understand” but simply modifies its functioning at various levels of autonomy. Continue reading ““AI” and the importance of “Neuter””