In the second part of the 2-part file, which he deals with the issue of “Cyber Attack with Cyber Attack”, experts’ brain-computer interface can open the door, cyber security threats, potential use of this technology for intelligence activities and evaluations of the legal dimension of brain hacker.
Maryland Global Campus University Faculty of Cyber Security and Technology Associate Professor Jason Pittman, “invader” and “non-invader” two types of brain-computer interfaces stating, the first place in the human brain, the other is placed on the skull and the same principle of the same principle in the same principle He said he was working.
Pittman explained that the BCIs are command -processing systems such as computer keyboards and mouse, “You use brain waves instead of using your hands, arms, shoulders, and musculoskeletal system.” He said.
Pittman pointed out that the hackers can get personal information such as account passwords by hacking the keyboards that record the key strokes, and that BCIs have a processor that transmits the command and that such traditional cyber security threats are also valid for the brain-computer interface.
Pittman noted that the invader BCIs are working bidirectional, “If I want to write a writing and think of a word, this word is written on the computer, but then the computer can give me feedback through the same channel. This goes to the brain-computer interface, that is to the brain.” he said.
Pittman pointed out that these electrical signals sent to the brain can contain threats, “Some interesting threats that you can trigger and change thoughts may be possible. Because you change biochemistry and neurochemistry at the level of electrical signal in the brain.” He said.
Cyber Security Weaknesses
“Are the devices we use in our daily lives, such as headphones and telephones, are open to hacking by brain hackers?” “Yes, absolutely.” “Everything we know about cyber security threats and weaknesses is valid. Because these are ultimately computer devices and qualities are the same.” he said.
Traditionally, Pittman pointed out that human behavior and thought can be shaped by manipulating information. he said that the brain has the potential to be manipulated in this way.
Speaking of the connection between the brain hacking and developing artificial intelligence technologies, Pittman said that some BCIs used artificial intelligence to perform signal transmission.
Pittman, in a study on the brain-computer interface, said that they use BCI instead of the drone control, they use artificial intelligence to do this, the signal in the system they use can be manipulated and vulnerable, he said.
Pittman said that when you consider pressing the up key in the interface they use, Pittman said, “If artificial intelligence is hacked, you can change the concept of up button. What if the upper command turns down? If I hack and go out of the range? ” He said.
Pittman stressed that artificial intelligence can be used to hack the brain-computer interface, to find methods and to attack these systems.
Pittman emphasized that states do not doubt that they use BCI technology to strengthen people. he said.
Pittman said that despite potential threats, the brain-computer interface and developing technologies are for the benefit of humanity.
Brain hacking with radio frequency
“Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States (MIT) after a doctoral researcher Alexander Armengol-Urpi also talked about an experiment with his colleagues on brain hacking,” using radio frequency waves, we can send false signals to the device that reads the brain waves and this can be seen as a real brain wave. ” he said.
In a study, Armengol Urpi stated that the brain hackers can obtain their personal information in theory by analyzing the brain waves in the theory and that the brain waves of the brain waves give a different reaction when someone looks at him and his telephone number, and that the brain is possible to hacking in this way.
Armengol Urpi, Pittman’ın evaluation of the opposite opinion, brain hacking and people’s movements of the people’s movements are not possible to manipulate.
Armengol Urpi said that the brain-computer interface system is not placed on someone’s head, and that the brain hacking cannot be done, and that an implant that will convert the brain into a computer connected to the internet in the future, said that the brain hacling may be worried.
Armengol Urpi shared his sensation that a company is working to invent a headset that will contact the skin and read the brain waves on the skin, and I think we will need to be more careful about such brain hackers. ” He said.
How is the brain hacking evaluated by law?
Prof. Dr. Thibault Moulin, Associate Professor of Law of Lyon Catholic University in France, stated that human movements can be directed by the use of brain-computer interfaces, that people can be painful or may be killed. It may be possible to access information and even read the mind. ” he said.
Moulin, whether brain hacking technology can be used by states, “I do not see any reason to prevent these techniques not to be used for military and intelligence operations. You can access information, affect movements, can trigger pain or play with a neural interface, if you can kill someone if you can avoid doing this that?” He said.
Moulin stated that he did not come across a lawful law in the domestic law of the countries, and pointed out that the criminal will be tried according to traditional criminal law if someone was killed by a brain hacking.
“The implementation of international human rights law is complicated in cross -border situations. Because their implementation is in the hands of a state with judicial authority abroad.” Moulin, who uses his statement, said that the brain hacking may not be enough to obtain judicial authority where international law is applied.
Moulin stated that torture can be associated with brain hacking as well as violation of freedom of conscience and freedom of thought, and pointed out that the problem of judicial authority has put the situation in a dead end.
Moulin emphasized that a foreign agent’s capture in an armed conflict is not seen as the use of weapons in international law for the purpose of hacking the brain for the purpose of reading mind, and that there is no prohibition for cyber espionage.
Moulin added that cyber attacks can be evaluated according to the degree of damaging someone’s brain.