Mass attacks and assaults, whether driven by personal motives or ideology, evoke significant concern and fear. However, actions can often be taken to prevent, defend against and respond to such attacks. A recent research project funded by the U.S. National Institute of Justice analysed over 600 mass attack typologies, hundreds of articles and resources and dozens of expert interviews to ultimately develop the Mass Attacks Defense Toolkit, an online educational toolkit with different strategies, guidance and links to additional resources.

These are the five critical points derived from this research project:

1. Many of these massive attacks could be proactively prevented. Public reports prevented nearly two-thirds of the foiled plots emphasised in the Toolkit. Therefore, it is important to be alert to possible warning signs, such as the following:

• Motivation: Inspired by previous attacks, desire to fulfil an extremist cause (especially in case of expulsion from a group/organisation for being too violent), desire to fulfil an extremist cause believing that there is no choice but to attack because of perceived danger or threat.
• Preparation: Creates a written plan, attempts to recruit others, seeks information on how to maximise impact, coordinates with known violent extremists or travels frequently.
• Exposure: The importance of detecting warning signs.

2. Communities need multidisciplinary teams to monitor and assess warning signs and determine what to do next. Each case needs a single responsible person to direct the necessary follow-up.

Threat assessment involves not only gauging the likelihood of an attack but also deciding the subsequent actions to be taken, many of which may fall beyond the purview of the criminal justice system.

3. Sufficient preparation minimizes casualties during the crucial initial phases of an attack before responders reach the scene. From a site security management perspective: Buffer zones need to be created, crowd movement opportunities need to be facilitated, it may be more appropriate to hide in a safe place rather than try to escape the scene safely and fight only when escape and hiding are not possible.

4. A successful collective reaction to a mass attack necessitates thorough planning and training that involves all individuals participating in the response. Effective responses to attacks include coordination between medical, police, fire and emergency services, as well as hospitals, victim service providers and site security managers.

For this to happen, leaders must provide adequate planning and training support and direction.

5. The recovery plan should include planning and training for potential consequences. Actions in the immediate aftermath of the attack include locating and arresting the attackers (where appropriate), investigating the perpetrators and possible conspirators, and providing access to mental health and emotional support, such as the establishment of family assistance and victim welfare centres.

Short-term actions include mental health and emotional support to victims and survivors, along with meetings and gatherings to discuss critical information about the response, as well as reviewing available resources for victims.

Long-term actions for relief groups include providing mental health and ongoing emotional support to survivors, overseeing the recovery process for victims, and engaging in recognition and learning, such as awards for acts of bravery, ceremonies for victims, and memorials and after-action commemoration and debriefing events.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

Europol has published the first report in this area, «The second quantum revolution: the impact of quantum computing and quantum technologies on law enforcement«. The report offers a forward-looking evaluation of the impact of quantum computing and quantum technologies on law enforcement. It also outlines the ways in which these new technologies could be applied.

The report is the result of joint work between the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), Europol’s European Cybercrime Centre (EC3) and Europol’s Innovation Lab.

This document provides a forward-looking assessment of how quantum computing and quantum technologies may affect policing around the world and what to do to be prepared.

Quantum computing and quantum technologies are knocking on the door of law enforcement with new opportunities, as well as new threats, that authorities should anticipate. The problem is that these emerging technologies have the potential to affect a wide range of applications used by law enforcement but could also be exploited by criminals.

A particularly acute concern is the impact of quantum computing on cryptography. While quantum computing could offer advantages to law enforcement in investigating cases and improving password decryption, it also threatens to break the encryption used to keep sensitive information secure today.

In a concept known as «store and decrypt later», criminal actors could already be accumulating encrypted information, such as illicitly obtained databases, protected files or communications data, and keeping them for the purpose of decrypting them later for criminal purposes.

To counter this, the transition to post-quantum cryptography is key. It is essential that law enforcement and data-driven organisations audit and protect their systems against a threat that is not just a concern for the distant future, but an imminent problem that requires immediate attention and action today.

In addition, the report highlights how quantum technologies could enhance machine learning and artificial intelligence, and the establishment of highly secure communication channels, as well as improve forensic capabilities.

Five key recommendations highlighted in the report for police:

• Observe quantum trends: monitor relevant developments to detect emerging threats.
• Develop knowledge and start experimenting to benefit from these developments in the future.
• Encourage research and development projects that collaborate closely with the scientific community to build a network of expertise.
• Evaluate the impact of quantum technologies on fundamental rights to ensure that law enforcement uses these new technologies while protecting these rights.
• Review your organisation’s transition plans to make sure that critical systems are protected in the post-quantum era.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

With the aim of creating a network of interconnected digital public administrations and accelerating the digital transformation of the European public sector, the representatives of the Member States (Coreper) have reached a common position on the proposal for legislation regarding measures for a high level of public sector interoperability across the European Union.

The aim of the draft Regulation is to establish a new cooperation framework for EU public administrations to ensure the perfect delivery of public services across borders and provide for support measures that promote innovation and improve the exchange of skills and knowledge.

With the objective of creating a set of interoperability solutions shared by the Union’s public sector, the proposed Regulation will establish an interoperability governance structure. In this manner, EU public administrations and other stakeholders have the opportunity to participate in and repurpose these solutions, collaborate on innovation, and generate added value.

Main elements of the European Commission’s proposal

The common position of the European Council maintains the general thrust of the Commission’s proposal with respect to the following:

• Rules to ensure structured EU cooperation where public administrations, supported by public and private actors, come together in the framework of projects for Member States, as well as regions and cities.
• A multi-level governance framework led by the Interoperable Europe Board and tasked with, among others, agreeing on common reusable resources.
• The exchange and reuse of interoperability solutions, driven by a one-stop-shop for solutions and community cooperation (Interoperable Europe portal) and supported by measures to promote innovation and improve the exchange of skills and knowledge.

The Council’s text modifies several parts of the Commission’s proposal. The main changes include:

• A clearer definition of the scope of the proposed legislation.
• Clarifications on the objectives and conditions of the mandatory interoperability assessment to comply with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity.
• Alignment with the artificial intelligence act regarding regulators and consistency with the General Data Protection Regulation.
• A stronger role for the Interoperable Europe Board, which is at the centre of the new governance structure established by the Regulation.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

Hate crimes harm entire communities as they are crimes resulting from a type of messaging that insults all members of a group, not just the immediate victims, who would be unwelcome and at immediate risk.

The harm caused by bias victimisation is multiplied when victims and justice agencies fail to recognise and report hate crimes as such. In addition, in cases where police fail to respond to or investigate hate crimes, relations between law enforcement and affected communities can suffer, and public trust in the police can diminish.

Although it is known that hate crimes are underreported in the United States, there is no clear understanding of why reporting rates are so low, to what extent, and what could be done to improve them. An even more fundamental question, with no single answer, would be: What constitutes a hate crime? Different state statutes and law enforcement agencies have different answers to this question, and this makes the task of identifying hate crimes and harmonising data collection and statistics on these offences even more complicated.

A recent series of evidence-based research initiatives, supported by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), is contributing by narrowing this critical knowledge gap and charting a better path forward for the immediate future. The study’s findings provide essential details on the causes of underreporting of hate crimes in various communities, including:

• The reluctance of hate crime victims to engage with law enforcement.
• The inability of victims and police to recognize certain victimisations as hate crimes.
• A very significant deficit of hate crime reporting by law enforcement agencies of all sizes and different hate crime definitions across jurisdictions.

An increasing number of members of the Latino community, especially those who recently immigrated to the United States, reported experiencing bias victimisation, although African American communities suffer more hate crimes than any other racial or ethnic group.

Many Latino individuals, especially immigrants, often report bias victimisation only to friends and family members. Often, they are very reluctant to share incidents with law enforcement or other authorities.

Members of the LGBTQ+ community also reported a high rate of bias victimisation. Some victims hesitate to report hate crimes to the authorities for fear of retaliation by law enforcement or because, among other reasons, they do not want to expose their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Many hate crimes, especially those targeting the LGBTQ+ community, result from mixed motivations, e.g., hate and theft. This is probably due to the perception that certain groups of victims are vulnerable and less likely to report crimes.

Often, law enforcement officers do not have the training and expertise to investigate, identify and report hate crimes. If a fully dedicated officer or unit were present, it would enhance the police’s ability to identify, respond to and report hate crimes.

Law enforcement agencies with established policies that support the investigation and enforcement of hate crimes are more likely to report investigating potential hate crimes in their jurisdiction.

In the end, the knowledge gained from NIJ-supported research on bias victimisation and hate crimes can strengthen recognition, reporting, and response to these crimes.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

For several years now, the United States has been experiencing a gun violence and unresolved shooting crisis of disturbing dimensions. Homicides involving a firearm increased by 34% from 2019, becoming the highest rate in the last 15 years. From 2020 to 2021, homicides involving firearms also increased by an additional 8%.

What is most alarming about this tragic phenomenon is that the clearance rates for these homicides are on the decline, with less than half of the murders reported to the FBI being cleared in 2020, the lowest clearance rate on record.

The microstamping technique will allow police to identify the serial numbers engraved on the cartridge case and trace a firearm back to the original gun dealer and purchaser without having to retrieve the gun itself. In this way, this seal can provide police with vital real-time intelligence to help solve shootings and identify firearm traffickers and distributors when appropriate.

Although the research on microstamping is reliable—a study conducted by the American Center for Gun Violence Solutions—and has no impact on firearm functionality, the industry in California has refused to incorporate it into its guns. How does this technology work?

1. Unique codes, consisting of numbers and letters, as well as geometric shapes as a backup, are recorded on the gun’s firing pin. These codes correspond to the serial number of the weapon.

2. Currently, when a gun is fired, the firing pin strikes the cartridge primer (the back end of the bullet cartridge case) and leaves unintentional microscopic marks (such as scratches or dings) on the cartridge case. Microstamping uses these techniques to intentionally print a specific code on the cartridge casing.

3. Microstamping would simplify this process, allowing law enforcement to identify the serial number of the weapon used in a crime, without having to match unintended markings or recover the weapon.

Why should this technology be used?

Microstamping could improve police forces’ ability to deal with weapons and gun violence:

• Quickly identify the weapon used in a shooting without having to retrieve, test and fire it.

• Provide information on multiple shootings carried out with the same weapon and identify suspects.

• Easily locate more weapons involved in a crime, providing information on how weapons are diverted to the illegal market and used in crimes.

• Help identify clues, solve shootings and imprison perpetrators.

• Eliminate bias in the current firearms identification process used in prosecutions by providing clear evidence—a code on a cartridge—rather than the subjective analysis of scratches and marks carried out by firearm surveyors. This would have the potential to reduce racial inequalities within the criminal legality of the system.

• Reduce the diversion of guns to the black market for firearms, where they are prone to being used in violent crimes that disproportionately harm African-American and Hispanic-Latino communities.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

Last August, the U.S. National Institute of Justice (NIJ) published the findings of an eight-year investigation by Dr. Robert C. Maher on the use of new forensic audio techniques to document and interpret firearm gunshot recordings.

The publication of his research came from the Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service, and the author recalls the beginnings of his research through a phone call asking if a gun allegedly used in the commission of a crime could be matched with an audio recording from a crime scene of a fired gun.

Dr. Maher’s initial work in this field began with understanding the acoustic characteristics of gunshots by obtaining repeated, high-quality recordings that were carried out under controlled conditions. This effort matched a strategic objective of NIJ’s Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences to support foundational research in forensic sciences.

To do so, he created a device and methodology that collected recordings of gunshots. In order to measure consistency, reliability and shot-to-shot variability, he collected data from a variety of firearms (five handguns, one revolver, one shotgun and two rifles).

Maher found that, although there are similarities when one fires the same gun 10 times, there are also notable differences from shot to shot. The duration of the blast varies from one firearm to another, but a given firearm also varies from one shot to another. Although the reason for the variability in duration is not yet known, the doctor suggests that this variation will have an effect on the forensic analysis of recordings that include gunshots of unknown origin.

As soon as he found a repeatable method for accurately recording gunshot acoustics under ideal conditions, Dr. Maher was ready to study the limitations of forensic interpretation of standard recording devices. This could cover mobile phones, land-mobile radios, personal audio recorders, audio data collected by emergency call centres and dispatch centre recording systems.

He compared signals at 11 different locations from microphones and personal recording devices, plus a body camera worn by the shooter and an internal recording system in a police vehicle. This allowed him to verify geometric predictions of arrival time and level at each recording site. For verification purposes, he also compared the times with a recording made by a mobile phone call to a corporate voice mail system.

He then examined several gunshot recordings simultaneously to see if relevant forensic information could be obtained, despite reflections, distortion, coding artefacts and other non-ideal characteristics. From the analyses, the doctor created a processing method to locate the source of the gunshots and reduce incoherent background noise, as well as a method to identify the most likely synchronisation point for multiple audio recordings.

For audio forensic analysis, it is more and more likely that several user-generated recordings may be presented as evidence in a criminal investigation. Audio evidence can come from portable smartphones, private surveillance systems, body-worn cameras and other unsynchronized recording devices. When numerous user-generated recordings are available, analysing the audio can yield spatial and temporal data about sound source location and orientation, including gunshots and other sounds.

Dr. Maher’s gunshot audio analysis was already used in the Cleveland Police Bureau’s trial of Michael Brelo, where Dr. Maher concluded that 15 of the 18 shots were fired from Brelo’s gun. Independent FBI investigations corroborated their findings.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

Robotaxis are not experimental test vehicles and this is no longer a drill. Many of San Francisco’s driverless ghost cars are commercial robotaxis, which compete directly with cabs, Uber and Lyft, as well as public transport. Although they make up a small portion, they are indeed an integral part of the city’s transportation system. Furthermore, Cruise and Waymo, the companies responsible for their operation, seem prepared to further extend their services in San Francisco, Austin, Phoenix, and potentially even Los Angeles in the upcoming months.

As researcher Benjamin Schneider denounced in the Technology review last July, there is a lack of urgency in the public discourse on robotaxis. He believes that most people, including many public decision-makers, are not aware of how fast this industry is advancing and how serious the short-term labour and transportation/safety impacts may be.

Designated agencies, such as the California Public Utilities Commission, make very important decisions about robotaxis in relative obscurity. Legal frameworks remain woefully inadequate: cities have no regulatory authority over the robotaxis that ply their streets, and the police cannot legally report them for infractions related to their movement.

Unfortunately, there is no government-approved standard framework for assessing the safety of autonomous vehicles. Cruise’s driverless vehicles, in particular, have demonstrated a concerning habit of unexpectedly coming to a halt in the middle of the road, causing significant traffic disruptions that last for prolonged periods. San Francisco police officials have documented at least 92 such incidents in just six months, including three that disrupted emergency services.

While these crucial stories hold significance, they overshadow the overall trend, which has been consistently favouring the growth of the robotaxi industry. During the recent years, Cruise and Waymo have successfully overcome significant regulatory challenges, ventured into new markets, and accomplished over a million uneventful, fully driverless miles in prominent American cities.

Robotaxis are operationally quite different from personally owned autonomous vehicles and are in a much better position for commercial deployment. These vehicles can be deployed in a tightly restricted region where they have undergone extensive training. The company responsible for their design can closely monitor their usage, and they can be promptly taken off the road in cases of adverse weather conditions or any other problems.

The very fact that these vehicles are programmed to adhere to traffic laws and speed limits inherently makes them seem like safer drivers compared to a significant portion of human drivers on the road.

The readiness of robotaxis for substantial deployment and the criteria to determine their readiness are still unknown and await further observation. But barring a significant change in momentum, such as an economic shock or horrible tragedy, robotaxis are positioned to continue their expansion. This is enough to warrant a broader discussion on how cities and society will change in the immediate future.

Cruise and Waymo are close to being authorized to offer all-day commercial robotaxi service in virtually all of San Francisco. This could immediately have a considerable economic impact on cab drivers in the city. The same is true for all the other cities where Cruise and Waymo are setting up shop. The prospect of automating professional drivers is no longer theoretical. This is a very real possibility for the near future.

As technology accelerates, public policy must accelerate along with it. But to keep up, citizens must have a clear vision of how fast the future might come.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

In June of last year, Jason Lau, the chief information security officer of Crypto.com, shared valuable insights on leveraging the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance cybersecurity through an article published on the renowned security website ooda.com.

The author believes that, in cybersecurity, it is necessary to establish a strategic advantage over criminals by proactively identifying and neutralising threats before they cause damage. In this regard, he also believes that continuous learning from past incidents can improve future responses, using AI-driven and guided tools to identify, understand and neutralise threats. Therefore, he proposes the following steps:

• Using an automated AI-driven threat intelligence platform that recognises external signatures, tactics, techniques and procedures in real time. This platform works to be significantly faster at identifying and neutralising phishing, malware and other endpoint threats by evolving and learning from attack methods.

• Implementing continuous automated alerting and monitoring of sensitive assets, from inventory used across the enterprise to scanning personally identifiable information to detect specific instances of plain text exposure and alerts to computers.

• Performing continuous AI-based code reviews, searching for code exceptions, cross-site scripting language errors, code injection, buffer overflows and more, and automatically replacing it with safe code while maintaining the functional integrity of the code.

• Engaging AI to detect malicious AI itself: indirect rapid injection attacks, which highlight emerging threats where adversaries attempt to infiltrate large language models, through AI used to detect malicious software and more.

As we move into an increasingly interconnected future, AI is undoubtedly a powerful ally, a cutting-edge piece of the puzzle, helping to quickly predict, prepare for and prevent impending cyberthreats.

However, it is also becoming very clear that owning such a powerful tool is not enough. Today’s cybersecurity leaders are called upon to do more than react and respond. They have to take a proactive stance, constantly planning, predicting and positioning their defences, making the necessary moves to stay one step ahead of the relentless wave of cyber adversaries.

However, by moving too fast, without a thoughtful and reflective approach, we risk treading on the fragile ground of ethics. How AI is used in cybersecurity is as important as why and where we choose to deploy it. As leaders, it is imperative to sew the seed of ethical considerations in our AI strategies, establishing a strong moral compass to guide us through the maze of technological possibilities.

In this cybersecurity chess game, tomorrow’s challenges are already on our doorstep. Having a cybersecurity plan is no longer an option, but a requirement for survival. But a critical aspect to consider is how AI can help empower security teams to become more agile and to adapt to new and emerging cyberthreats.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

The undeniable challenges posed by chatbots and AI will not suddenly disappear. This is how the specialised security website Oodaloop put it. And while many well-informed and well-intentioned people have signed an open letter calling for a 6-month pause in advanced AI research, doing so is unrealistic and unwise. The problems posed are complex, confusing and difficult to solve because they are incredibly convoluted and polyhedral. It involves so many stakeholders, intersecting domains and competing interests that it makes it difficult to address them. A pause in technological research will not help solve these human conundrums.

What will help is systematic, methodical and massive public engagement that informs pilot projects associated with the business and civilian implications of artificial intelligence at the national and local levels. Everyone will be affected by the promises and potential dangers of the technological shift in thinking presented by advances in AI. Therefore, everyone should have a voice, and everyone should work to ensure that society is informed and prepared to thrive in a rapidly changing world that will soon look very different.

At first glance, stopping its development may seem compelling given the challenges posed by large language models (LLMs), but there are several reasons why this approach is flawed. To begin with, it is essential to take global competition into account. Even if all U.S. companies agreed to a pause, other countries would continue their AI research, making any national or international agreement less effective.

Secondly, AI diffusion is already underway. The Alpaca experiment at Stanford University demonstrated that it could be refined to match the capabilities of ChatGPT-3 for less than $600. This advance accelerates the spread of AI by making it more accessible to various actors, including those with malicious intent.

Thirdly, history teaches us that a pause in AI could lead to secret development. Publicly halting AI research could prompt nations to conduct advanced AI research in secret, which could have dire consequences for open society. This scenario is similar to that of the Hague Convention of 1899, where the major powers publicly banned poison-filled shells, only to continue their research in secret, and eventually deploy noxious gases during World War I.

Going forward, to effectively address the challenges arising from AI, a proactive, results-oriented and cooperative approach with the public should be encouraged. Think tanks and universities can engage in dialogue with the public about how to work, live, govern and coexist with modern technology that affects society as a whole. By including diverse voices in the decision-making process, we can better address and solve complex AI challenges at the regional and national levels.

In addition, industry and political leaders should be encouraged to participate in the search for non-partisan, multi-sectoral solutions to keep civil society stable. Working together, the gap between technological advances and their social implications can be bridged.

Finally, it is essential to pilot AI schemes in various sectors, such as labour, education, health, law and civil society. We should learn how to create responsible civil environments where AI can be responsibly developed and deployed. These initiatives will help us better understand and integrate artificial intelligence into our lives, reducing risk while ensuring that its potential is realised for the greater good.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français

British Columbia’s police chiefs have successfully negotiated with the provincial government for the financial support to develop an application that can detect, document and assess what kind of mental health resources would best serve people at risk.

This application is geared to help officers who respond to an intervention avoid conflict and determine what type of assistance is best for a person in crisis. B.C. police estimate that between 30 and 50% of calls for police service may involve mental health problems. Until now, the police often asked the same questions as the hospital. By doing so, before the scene is left, officers are already sharing information with the hospital and health professionals.

In an urgent, violent or high-risk situation, little information is sent to Surrey Memorial Hospital. When it is a non-life-threatening call, police officers complete a checklist (irritability, delusions, hallucinations, etc.) and the application generates a report that goes to a hospital physician, who may recommend intervention for that person under the Mental Health Act or suggest alternative care.

When an individual has been previously assessed with the HealthIM application, there is a baseline of information available to officers, including specific advice to de-escalate the intervention and avoid any triggers. Information can help de-escalate a situation earlier and more safely, resulting in better care for the affected person.

As Penny Daflos of CTV News Vancouver explains in a report, the HealthIM app, promoted as a better connection between police and the healthcare system, has been the fruit of a long, comprehensive plan to address one of the most problematic public safety challenges.

According to the Superintendent of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Todd Preston, and the president of the BC Association of Chiefs of Police, this app can help determine whether police service users actually need any medical assistance. This can prevent officers from spending busy hours waiting to hand patients over to health professionals, a procedure that can also stigmatise these people.

The Delta Police Department is currently the only agency already using the new system, which was first established among Ontario’s municipal police forces, and has been gradually implemented in all Prairie provinces.

Since implementing the app in 2019, time spent on paperwork has been reduced, reporting has been standardised, information sharing with healthcare workers has been improved and assessments were reduced by 331 people during 2021 alone.

_____

Aquest apunt en català / Esta entrada en español / Post en français