The UK and others have seen “an industrial-scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment”, Prime Minister Andy Burnham told the United Nations General Assembly’s 81st session in New York.
He said of ‘Russian agencies’: “They’ve amplified far right narratives. And we have evidence that they tried to interfere with the 2019 General Election. We also know that they have tried to stoke tensions and unrest in the wake of horrific events.” He said that the Kremlin spends roughly £1.3 billion “on manipulating information”, noting that British companies and institutions have also suffered cyber-attacks. “And we know that AI will multiply the threat.”
The PM, addressing the general debate (pictured courtesy of the UN), said the UK will set up a ‘National Centre for Information Defence’, ‘to detect, attribute and disrupt these kinds of hostile state information attacks’. He added: “As more elections approach across Europe, more nations are grappling with these issues – some for the first time. So, we’re ready to share our understanding of how these actors work, and how we can respond – because this is vital for our collective security and resilience.”
He said that universities and the BBC are among British ‘brands’ forged by ‘Russian agencies’, and spoke also of ‘cyber-attacks on our companies and institutions’.
On artificial intelligence, he spoke of an AI defence partnership with the United States to protect critical national infrastructure. “And we will work towards agreeing a single set of global principles and standards to ensure the transparency and access we need to increase our preparedness – and to ensure that AI development is safe.” For his speech in full visit gov.uk.
Background
Official disquiet and response to Russian mis- and dis-information is not new; a ‘Defending Democracy Taskforce’ dates from the Rishi Sunak Conservative Government and was announced by the then Home Office Security Minister Tom Tugendhat in 2022. In Tugendhat’s words it was to bring together ‘experts from across Government, security and intelligence agencies’, against foreign interference. Speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme, Defence Secretary Wes Streeting related a fake audio clip purporting to be him speaking about Palestine spread on social media during the 2024 general election. His points; the refutation spread less, and with AI the prospect is of ever more convincing, even video, fakes. More generally, ‘synthetic media’ could make users of the online world ever less able to tell apart what’s fake from real, and hence unable to know who or what, if anything, to trust, whether for news, leisure or business.
Comment
Nick Benson, CEO at CREST, the international non-profit cyber body, described Burnham’s call for robust global AI standards is a promising step. Benson said: “There is a lot of polarised debate at the moment about whether AI represents an existential threat or whether it’s just in a classic hype cycle driven by share price. As is often the case, it’s probably somewhere in the middle. Once a technology passes the threshold of high potential for mass damage (whether economic, physical or otherwise), even before it has manifested, policy setters need to act. The arguments about AGI or sentience are therefore moot – if the current technology meets this threshold, the time is upon us to organise and respond.
“There are many safety dimensions to AI, from child safety, to weapons proliferation and fraud. The cybersecurity safety aspect is getting a great deal of attention though and for good reason. When the physical world can be threatened by actions in the digital world, we are all incentivised to demand more from international and national standard setters.
“This is why high-level international principles are important to establish an essential baseline. After all, we have to start somewhere. However, policy goals and voluntary commitments alone aren’t enough to protect AI-enabled systems and critical infrastructure. It is a fundamentally technical, complex and constantly evolving field.
“Managing this transition necessitates the implementation of actionable, technical frameworks backed by independent assurance and practical testing to leave no stone unturned. As AI multiplies the speed and precision of threats, long-term trust is at stake.
“Organisations and teams across the cybersecurity ecosystem need to actively demonstrate their technical capabilities and professional governance. Those deploying or evaluating AI systems should benchmark their processes against assessable industry standards, publicly commit to principles for responsible use of AI, and seek independent accreditation.
“Adopting independently verified frameworks – both for the safe delivery of AI-enabled services and the rigorous testing of AI systems themselves – is now the only way to provide our communities with genuine confidence and keep pace with ever-evolving risks.”
