Hacker attack on the brain

By becoming cyborgs, will we be able to protect our brains from hacking?

Nikolay Khizhnyak, hi-news.ru , based on ScienceDaily: Who is responsible if a brain-controlled robot drops a baby?

The rapid development of the field of brain-machine interfaces and neuroprosthetics is gradually leading us to a revolution in the methods of treatment and support for paralyzed people. At the same time, these technologies may find a more universal application in the future and become a starting point for the further evolution of mankind and its transition to a new species – cyborgs. But before we reach such heights, we need to make sure that such neural devices are completely reliable, safe and completely protected from external influence – hacker attacks, to put it simply.

With dreams of our bright cybernetic future, researchers from the Wyss Center for Bio and Neuroengineering in Switzerland (Wyss Center for Bio and Neuroengineering) published their work “Help, hope, and hype: Ethical dimensions of neuroprosthetics” on the Science portal.

The task of its authors is not only to describe the opportunities that the field of neurotechnology will open up to us, but also to increase public attention to the dangers that may lie in wait for us on the way to this ultra-high-tech future. And it is also worth noting that the authors have developed several ways that will mitigate potential problems even before they occur.

Not to mention the rapid development of neurotechnologies is becoming impossible today. Engineers and researchers are actively developing and improving brain-machine interfaces that will allow paralyzed people to regain control of their limbs, amputees to effectively control robotic prostheses, and patients with impaired speech functions to restore their ability due to the ability to transmit their thoughts. Surprisingly, there is already a lot of progress in this direction. Scientists have created an exoskeleton that allows a person with paralyzed lower limbs to hit a ball. A paralyzed laboratory monkey was taught to control a wheelchair with the help of thoughts. The brain–to-brain interface being developed allowed a person to control the movements of other people's limbs. Each such technological breakthrough allows us to learn a little bit more about the brain and how it works. But even more importantly, all these technologies have the potential to return self-sufficiency and independence to amputees and paralyzed people.

But all these technologies, unfortunately, have a downside. According to John Donohue, director of the Wyss Center, serious ethical issues are beginning to appear around this area, and therefore it's time to start thinking about how neuroprosthetics and the development of brain-machine interfaces may face abuse in the future, as well as how to protect yourself from this.

"Despite the fact that we still don't fully understand how the brain works, we are getting closer to the moment when we can adequately decode certain brain signals. Therefore, we must be aware of the impact all this can have on society," Donohue comments.

"We must carefully analyze the likely consequences of living side by side with semi-intelligent machines controlled by the human brain, and we must have ready-developed mechanisms that can convince us of their safety and compliance with our moral and ethical standards."

The Wyss Center is concerned that with the broader integration of these neural devices into our daily lives, the capabilities of these tools will also expand. They will become more versatile. Already, brain-machine interfaces can be used to control a robotic arm, grab a cup or, looking at a computer screen, select a certain word in the text. But someday such devices, only more advanced, will be used both by an emergency worker to eliminate a dangerous gas leak, and by the mother of a child who does not have enough extra hands to calm her crying baby.

If something goes wrong in these cases, for example, a semi-automatic robotic hand of a worker turns the wrong tap or a mother accidentally drops her child from her robotic hands, it is important to ask yourself the question: where does the zone of responsibility begin and end and who in such cases should be found guilty? The legal system of the future will have to determine whether this is the responsibility of the manufacturer of the robotic product (a defect or a software error was found in the design) or the user (improper use or external unauthorized impact on the integrity of the product design).

To minimize such potential problems, the authors of the work discussed today suggest that any semi–autonomous system should be equipped with an automatic lock function and, in case of improper or unplanned use, be activated bypassing the direct brain-computer interaction channel. If an artificial limb starts performing actions that the user did not mean to perform, then such a "switch" will be able to independently make a decision on instant deactivation of the system, preventing potential trouble.

Another aspect of concern to researchers is the security of the user's privacy and the need to protect any personal information that will be recorded by such systems. It is very likely that systems based on the brain–computer interface will collect a variety of information about the neurological status of the user, after which it will be transmitted to the computer. Naturally, such a scheme cannot but cause some concerns about the protection of confidential data. According to the researchers of the Wyss Center, the information collected can be stolen and used improperly.

"The protection of private neurological information about people who are completely paralyzed and use brain–computer interfaces as the only possible means of communication with the outside world is especially important," says Nils Bierbaumer, senior researcher at the Wyss Center.

"The successful calibration of systems working with the brain–computer interface will, among other things, depend on how their brains will respond to personal questions related to their family, for example, the name, age and marital status of children, and so on. For all people involved in this case, a strict system of personal data protection must be provided, which will be required for the correct operation of the device functions. We are talking about both information that will be clarified with the help of personal questions, and neurological information of the patient."

Researchers from the Wyss Center are even more concerned about the possibility of digital hacking of a device connected to the brain by intruders, which may actually endanger the life of the user of this device. With the help of the so-called "brain hacking", malicious manipulations with brain implants can be carried out. Hackers will be able to gain control over the movements of human robotic limbs.

A possible solution to this problem will include an increased level of information encryption, the creation of reliable network security and an open communication channel between the manufacturer of the product and its user. The implementation of most of these proposed measures will be a very difficult task, at least due to the likely lack of universal standards that will be applied in security systems. Based on this, the specialists of the Wissa Center believe that the time has come to start thinking about the ways that will allow everyone to coordinate and develop universal industrial standards for the development and integration of the necessary protective measures.

"Some of the concerns pointed out by the authors of the work may one day turn into real problems. Therefore, I agree that the development of some universal standards is necessary right now, so that later we do not find ourselves in a situation when it will be too late," comments Adam Kaper, senior researcher at the Center for the Study of Ethics and Public Opinion.

And yet, Caper, who did not take part in writing the work under discussion, is partially skeptical about the option in which someone would even want to hack the brain-computer interface of a completely paralyzed person or an interface used as a channel of neural feedback between a person and training systems, that is, programs using non–invasive brain scanning methods, such as electroencephalography devices, systems for training one's behavior, reducing stress, practicing meditation, and so on.

"What benefit can a hacker get from such a hack? Yes, practically none. Of course, concerns about the security and protection of personal information may become an important subject in the future. But it seems to me that this is a premature conversation."

Kaper adds that the increased degree of concerns associated with the introduction of brain–computer interfaces and semi-autonomous robots can be compared with the level of excitement that arises in society about global robotization, which promises to be the next step in the development of our social life. And although Kaper agrees with some aspects, in his opinion, in general, the problem, at least now, seems more far-fetched than real.

"The authors of the work believe that we should not greatly increase the medical literacy of the population and its awareness of the functioning of neurophysiological systems that will be used for such types of prosthetics. But this is nonsense," says Kaper.

In his opinion, society itself is unlikely to show increased interest in such highly specialized topics. Nevertheless, the expert admits that it is often very difficult to find the right time to start a public dialogue on ethical and social issues regarding the mass integration of new technologies into our daily lives.

"There is always a risk of making such statements too early, when we ourselves will not really fully understand whether we are really facing a serious problem. There have already been such precedents. Take nanoethics, for example, whose supporters a decade ago, without really understanding the issue, raised a fuss, saying that advanced nanotechnology would appear almost instantly, and even tried to build a real academic discipline on it. But in the end, it turned out that the development of nanotechnology is a much more flexible and smooth process."

"I think that from this point of view, the authors of the work discussed today can only be praised. Praise for the fact that they express their concerns not at all with radical statements, but with quite calm explanations," comments Kaper.

Of course, the researchers of the Wyss Center have raised a very important topic. Sooner or later, the technologies described today will find their way into our daily lives and will serve as support not only for the incapacitated, but also for quite healthy people.

In the future, non–invasive brain-computer interfaces can be used to create a kind of telekinetic connection with the outside world, in which we can control the lighting in the house with our thoughts or at least just switch TV channels. In other words, further progress will be able to turn these technologies into a technological form of telepathy. As for the researchers from the Wyss Center, their key message is that we should be ready for this and be able to prevent the use of such technologies for malicious purposes.

Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru  03.07.2017