Hawking's speech software goes open source for disabled

[Snowhog]

This is amazing news.

http://phys.org/news/2014-12-hawking...-disabled.html

[Feathers McGraw]

That's cool, I think if I was going to rely on a piece of software to interpret me I'd want it to be open source... you could build in so many malicious features to something like that if you wanted to.

[SteveRiley]

And would you examine the code for yourself, or presume that "someone else" must already have?

[Feathers McGraw]

I appreciate the point you're trying to make... but if I was using it to translate eye movements into speech or text and I had no other way of communicating, then yes I think I would!

Plus, it's quite a niche thing, so the chances that someone else has reviewed it are pretty small. And I'd be looking for malicious features (reasonably easy to spot), not exploitable security flaws, which would presumably be more difficult to spot.

[SteveRiley]

Hawking's advantage is that he is neither deaf nor blind. So he can verify that the tool's output matches the input he fed it, and that malicious features aren't (immediately) obvious. But imagine for a moment that he were deaf. Then he'd have no choice but to trust that the tool's audio output matches his input, and hasn't been maliciously modified to say things he didn't say. Note that this isn't a new problem at all: those who rely on foreign language translators must operate under the exact same trust model, as do those who are deaf and observing someone signing.

Rarely does the introduction of technology actually introduce new threats. Consider identity theft: what a silly phrase. No one can "steal" my identity and prevent me from being me anymore. "Identity theft" is actually an impersonation attack, and humans have been performing this attack for, well, as long as we've been on the planet. Technology just helps the attack scale better.

[Feathers McGraw]

That's true, but he's an influential public figure, and a top physicist, I'm sure he gets involved in some "classified" projects. Say for example you wanted a "kill switch" in case he said something you didn't want the public to know about. It could even be automatic: when he tries to say/type something with certain keywords in, it could say/type something else entirely. He wouldn't know until he tried it.

On a more personal level, eventually, he might get to the point where his disease gets so bad that he wants to choose euthanasia. If someone is asking you about that question you want to be damn sure your piece of software, the only method of communication you have with the world, isn't giving the wrong answer!

I agree about "identity theft", it's a dumb name. It's a good point about technology in general too, I was thinking along the same lines talking to my gran recently, she had a phishing email pretending to be some account or other and saying she needed to change her password. She's pretty smart and would have no problem spotting a scam if someone came to her front door and asked for information like that, but she wasn't sure this time and it really worried her. I guess some people doubt themselves when it comes to computers because "the computer knows best" and some companies and programs have bad practices that make people think it just might be the real deal.

[SteveRiley]

Say for example you wanted a "kill switch" in case he said something you didn't want the public to know about. It could even be automatic: when he tries to say/type something with certain keywords in, it could say/type something else entirely. He wouldn't know until he tried it.

That scares the shopt out of me. Why not just implant kill switches into every person who's born, then, for the same reason? I don't think you're advocating this in general, are you advocating it for Hawking?

On a more personal level, eventually, he might get to the point where his disease gets so bad that he wants to choose euthanasia.

A option he has both advocated and briefly considered.

I was thinking along the same lines talking to my gran recently, she had a phishing email pretending to be some account or other and saying she needed to change her password... but she wasn't sure this time and it really worried her. I guess some people doubt themselves when it comes to computers because "the computer knows best" and some companies and programs have bad practices that make people think it just might be the real deal.

It's good she at least paused to think about what was in the email -- many people don't. Phishing continues to be a major threat, even to large organizations. Spear phishing has lately become quite good.

[Feathers McGraw]

That scares the shopt out of me. Why not just implant kill switches into every person who's born, then, for the same reason? I don't think you're advocating this in general, are you advocating it for Hawking?

I'm not advocating it EVER, for anyone. I just think it's a foreseeable risk (but unlikely), given that some people and organisations do evil things.

I'd want my pacemaker software to be free too if I had one, for the same reason. Every time there's a study into the security of devices like that it's bad news!

A option he has both advocated and briefly considered.

Even more important that he gets his true message across if the time ever comes then!

Phishing continues to be a major threat, even to large organizations. Spear phishing has lately become quite good.

Yeah I was reading about that recently... when it makes it to mainstream news you know it's bad:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30278356

[SteveRiley]

I'm not advocating it EVER, for anyone. I just think it's a foreseeable risk (but unlikely), given that some people and organisations do evil things.

That's what I thought. Just wanted to be sure!

I'd want my pacemaker software to be free too if I had one, for the same reason. Every time there's a study into the security of devices like that it's bad news!

I predict we'll start seeing articles about hacking humans sometime in the next five years.

[Feathers McGraw]

That's what I thought. Just wanted to be sure!

How could you doubt me?

I predict we'll start seeing articles about hacking humans sometime in the next five years.

In stores soon: Google "I", the enhanced eyeball.

[SteveRiley]

How could you doubt me?

Looking back, I think it was your sentence structure that threw me: "I'm sure he gets involved in some 'classified' projects. Say for example you wanted a 'kill switch' in case he said something you didn't want the public to know about." I read that as problem -> solution. "Hawking might possess confidential information, we'd better install a mute button."

In stores soon: Google "I", the enhanced eyeball.

Noooooooooo! Keep it awayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

[Feathers McGraw]

Well you've got to think like a bad guy to know what you're up against, right? I should have prefixed it with "Imagine you work for a government agency..."

[Snowhog]

Well you've got to think like a bad guy to know what you're up against, right? I should have prefixed it with "Imagine you work for a government agency..."

But I do work for a government agency! 😳

[SteveRiley]

Well you've got to think like a bad guy to know what you're up against, right?

Indeed. When people ask how to learn about information security, my response is, "You have to learn how to think like a bad guy without falling into the spell of becoming one."

[Feathers McGraw]

But I do work for a government agency! 😳

The way some Americans go on, you'd think yours was the most evil of them all!