[论文解读] Personhood credentials: Artificial intelligence and the value of privacy-preserving tools to distinguish who is real online

Steven Adler, Zoë Hitzig+30 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|Aug 15, 2024

Ethics and Social Impacts of AI被引用 7

一句话总结

本文提出了人格凭证（PHCs），这是一种隐私保护的数字凭证，用于在不公开身份信息的前提下证明用户是真实人士，以对抗基于 AI 的在线欺骗，同时保护隐私。

ABSTRACT

Anonymity is an important principle online. However, malicious actors have long used misleading identities to conduct fraud, spread disinformation, and carry out other deceptive schemes. With the advent of increasingly capable AI, bad actors can amplify the potential scale and effectiveness of their operations, intensifying the challenge of balancing anonymity and trustworthiness online. In this paper, we analyze the value of a new tool to address this challenge: "personhood credentials" (PHCs), digital credentials that empower users to demonstrate that they are real people -- not AIs -- to online services, without disclosing any personal information. Such credentials can be issued by a range of trusted institutions -- governments or otherwise. A PHC system, according to our definition, could be local or global, and does not need to be biometrics-based. Two trends in AI contribute to the urgency of the challenge: AI's increasing indistinguishability from people online (i.e., lifelike content and avatars, agentic activity), and AI's increasing scalability (i.e., cost-effectiveness, accessibility). Drawing on a long history of research into anonymous credentials and "proof-of-personhood" systems, personhood credentials give people a way to signal their trustworthiness on online platforms, and offer service providers new tools for reducing misuse by bad actors. In contrast, existing countermeasures to automated deception -- such as CAPTCHAs -- are inadequate against sophisticated AI, while stringent identity verification solutions are insufficiently private for many use-cases. After surveying the benefits of personhood credentials, we also examine deployment risks and design challenges. We conclude with actionable next steps for policymakers, technologists, and standards bodies to consider in consultation with the public.

研究动机与目标

• 激发在不侵蚀隐私和公民自由的前提下对抗基于 AI 的在线欺骗的必要性。
• 界定人格凭证（PHCs）的概念及其基础要求。
• 论证 PHCs 如何减少假账户、机器人网络，以及 AI 代理的误导行为。
• 将 PHCs 与现有对策进行比较，并识别部署挑战与治理考量。
• 为政策制定者、技术人员和标准机构提出推进 PHCs 的可执行步骤。

提出的方法

• 调查在线欺骗和AI驱动威胁在不可区分性和可扩展性方面的格局。
• 定义 PHCs 并形式化两个基础要求：凭证限制和不可链接的化名性。
• 将 PHCs 在匿名凭证和人格证明概念的更广泛生态系统中定位。
• 评估 PHCs 如何补充或改进现有对策（验证码、经济门槛、AI 内容检测、外观/文档验证）。
• 概述设计、治理和部署方面的考虑因素，包括公平获取、言论自由、对权力的制衡，以及对攻击的鲁棒性。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 人格凭证（PHCs）是什么，以及它们如何用于在不暴露身份的前提下信号真实人物互动？
• RQ2 PHCs 如何在保护用户隐私和跨服务不可链接性的同时解决基于 AI 的欺骗？
• RQ3 部署 PHCs 以实现高效且安全运行所需的关键设计要求和治理考量？
• RQ4 在遏制欺骗方面，PHCs 与现有工具（CAPTCHAs、付费访问、内容水印、生物识别）相比如何？
• RQ5 政策制定者、技术人员和标准机构应采取哪些具体步骤来试点和采用 PHCs？

主要发现

• PHCs 通过不可链接的化名和凭证限制实现对每个个体的认证，同时不泄露身份。
• PHCs 依赖密码学证明来区分真实人类与 AI 驱动的参与者，解决不可区分性与可扩展性等问题。
• PHCs 能比传统方法（如 CAPTCHA 或生物识别检查）更稳健地缓解假冒账户、机器人攻击和 AI 代理的误导行为。
• PHCs 作为对现有对策的补充但不取代它们，凸显隐私保护优势以及需要谨慎设计的潜在脆弱性。
• 本文概述治理与部署挑战，包括公平获取、保护言论自由和对权力的制衡，并为公共利益相关者提出下一步行动。
• 它强调多颁发者生态系统和离线验证组件，以防止凭证伪造并提升鲁棒性。

Figure 1 : Personhood credentials rely on two deficits of AI.