World economy, policy and information technology

State data security backed by Artificial Intelligence and Zero Knowledge Proofs in the context of sanctions and economic pressure

Economic Annals-XXI

Economic Annals-XXI: Volume 202, Issue (3-4), Pages: 4-16

Citation information:
Jalili, A. Q., & Dziatkovskii, A. (2023). State data security backed by Artificial Intelligence and Zero Knowledge Proofs in the context of sanctions and economic pressure. Economic Annals-XXI, 202(3-4), 4-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V202-01

EA-XXI-V202-01Download PDF

Abdul Qawi Jalili
MA (Economics),
Chief Business Development Officer,
GOTBIT CONSULTING LLC, USA
175 Piccadilly, St. James’s, London, W1J 9TB, United Kingdom
Qawi@gotbit.io
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0701-5777

Anton Dziatkovskii
PhD (Pedagogy),
Expert in Artificial Intelligence,
Zero Knowledge Proof, Blockchain, and Data Science;
CEO,
Platinum VC & Incubator Australia
Level 8, 7 Macquarie Place, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia
a@platinum0x.com.au
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7408-3054

State data security backed by Artificial Intelligence and Zero Knowledge Proofs in the context of sanctions and economic pressure

Abstract. This research paper aims to elucidate the intricate relationship between artificial intelligence (AI), state data security, and the volatile circumstances induced by sanctions and economic pressure. By undertaking a comprehensive literature review, the study not only offers a historical context of state data security mechanisms but also delves deeply into the advancements provided by AI-driven solutions. The work serves as a crucial reference for policymakers, cybersecurity experts, and academic researchers, laying a foundation for the nuanced understanding of AI’s capabilities and limitations within the realms of state data security and economic stressors.

Employing an analytical framework, the paper systematically distills knowledge from a wide array of sources, including academic articles, technical reports, policy briefs, and international standards. This multidimensional analysis allows for a holistic understanding of the state-of-the-art AI technologies, their applicability in fortifying state data security, and the ethical labyrinth that states must navigate.

Paper underscores a multitude of challenges and ethical considerations that are often overshadowed by the technological prowess of AI. These encompass issues such as data privacy infringement, potential for mass surveillance, and ethical quandaries around bias and discrimination. The paper also throws light on the pivotal factors of accountability and transparency, essential for maintaining public trust in AI-augmented state security mechanisms. The study raises awareness about AI-driven cyber threats, focusing on the paradox of employing AI to enhance security while also becoming susceptible to advanced AI-driven cyberattacks. Paper addresses the long-term sustainability and resilience of AI-enabled security measures, particularly in the context of evolving cyber threats and the inherent instability brought about by economic pressures and sanctions. The resilience of AI algorithms and systems under these specific conditions is scrutinized, offering a forward-looking perspective on the adaptability and robustness of AI technologies in safeguarding state data.

Keywords: State Data; AI; Security; Cybersecurity; Sanctions; Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP); Algorithm; Ethics

JEL Classifications: H56; O33; O38; F51; K42

Acknowledgements and Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Contribution: The authors contributed equally to this work

Data Availability Statement: The dataset is available from the authors upon request.

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V202-01

References

  1. Abadi, M., & Andersen, D. G. (2016). Learning to protect communications with adversarial neural cryptography. arXiv.
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1610.06918
  2. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). (2019). Financial Sector Cybersecurity Requirements in the Asia-Pacific Region.
    https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/190429_CarterCrumpler_APAC_WEB.pdf
  3. European Commission. (2022). Investment in AI-driven security education and research: Opportunities and challenges. European Commission Report.
    https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/european-approach-artificial-intelligence
  4. Gartner. (2019). Gartner predicts 75% of enterprises will shift from piloting to operationalizing AI by 2024.
    https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2021-03-16-
    gartner-identifies-top-10-data-and-analytics-technologies-trends-for-2021
  5. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep learning. MIT Press.
  6. Guo, H., Cheng, J., Wang, J., Chen, T., Yuan, Y., Li, H., & Sheng, V. S. (2022). IoT Data Blockchain-Based Transaction Model Using Zero-Knowledge Proofs and Proxy Re-encryption. In Sun, X., Zhang, X., Xia, Z., & Bertino, E. (Eds.) Artificial Intelligence and Security. ICAIS 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 13339, 882-895.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06788-4_48
  7. IBM. (2023). Cost of a data breach report.
    https://www.ibm.com/security/data-breach
  8. Jagielski, M., Oprea, A., Biggio, B., Liu, C., Nita-Rotaru, C., & Li,  B. (2018). Manipulating machine learning: Poisoning attacks and countermeasures for regression learning. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) (pp. 19-35). San Francisco, CA, USA.
    https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2018.00057
  9. Kandias, M., Mitrou, L., Stavrou, V., & Gritzalis, D. (2013). Which side are you on? A new Panopticon vs. privacy. Information Systems Frontiers, 15(3), 427-445.
    https://doi.org/10.5220/0004516500980110
  10. Knight, W. (2017). The dark secret at the heart of AI. MIT Technology Review, 120(3), 54-65.
    https://www.technologyreview.com/2017/04/11/5113/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/
  11. Kshetri, N. (2018). Will blockchain emerge as a tool to break the poverty chain in the Global South? Third World Quarterly, 39(8), 1478-1496.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1298438
  12. Morais, E., Koens, T., van Wijk, C., & Koren, A. (2020). A Survey on Zero Knowledge Range Proofs and Applications. ArXiv, Computer Science.
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.06381
  13. Moya, C. V., Bermejo Higuera, J. R., Higuera, J. B., & Sicilia Montalvo, J. A. (2023). Implementation and Security Test of Zero-Knowledge Protocols on SSI Blockchain. Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5552.
    https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095552
  14. OECD. (2019). AI governance frameworks: Principles and recommendations. OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 274.
    https://doi.org/10.1787/20716826
  15. Satrajit, G., & Aniket, K. (2015). Post-quantum forward secure onion routing. Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems, 2(1), 1-22.
    https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/008.pdf
  16. Scherer, M. U. (2016). Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 29(2), 353-400.
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2609777
  17. Shokri, R., & Shmatikov, V. (2015). Privacy-preserving deep learning. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 1310-1321.
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2810103.2813687
  18. Singh, N., Dayama, P., & Pandit. V., (2021). Zero Knowledge Proofs Towards Verifiable Decentralized AI Pipelines. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2021/1633​.
    https://ia.cr/2021/1633
  19. Souza, R. R., Coelho, F. C., Shah, R., & Connelly, M. (2016). Using Artificial Intelligence to Identify State Secrets. ArXiv, Computer Science.
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1611.00356
  20. United Nations. (2023). International Community Must Urgently Confront New Reality of Generative, Artificial Intelligence, Speakers Stress as Security Council Debates Risks, Rewards. United Nations General Assembly SC/15359.
    https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15359.doc.htm#:~:text=The%20international%20
    community%20must%20urgently,inherent%20in%20this%20emerging%20technology
  21. Uzun, M. (2020). Artificial Intelligence and State Economic Security. In Bilgin, M., Danis, H., Demir, E., & Tony-Okeke, U. (Eds.) Eurasian Economic Perspectives. Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, 15(1). Springer, Cham.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48531-3_13
  22. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2023). Attention is all you need. ARXIV, (version, v7).
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762
  23. Xuefei, Y., Yanming, Z., & Jiankun, H. (2021). A Comprehensive Survey of Privacy-preserving Federated Learning: A Taxonomy, Review, and Future Directions. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(6), 131.
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3460427
  24. Zarsky, T. (2016). The trouble with algorithmic decisions: An analytic road map to examine efficiency and fairness in automated and opaque decision making. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 118-132.
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915605575

Received 20.01.2023
Received in revised form 12.02.2023
Accepted 16.02.2023
Available online 10.04.2023

EA-XXI-V202-01Download PDF
In, , , , , , , , , ,

More Papers