SoK：‘互操作性 vs 安全性’争论：一个技术框架
SoK: "Interoperability vs Security" Arguments: A Technical Framework
AI总结：
本文提出一个技术框架，系统分析欧盟反垄断程序中‘安全 vs 互操作性’争论，分类讨论其工程、审查和混合类别，并通过案例研究揭示经济激励、市场力量和安全之间的相互作用。
摘要：
关于科技巨头垄断权力的担忧在最近的媒体和政策讨论中占据了重要地位，因为欧盟、美国及其他地区的监管机构已加大了推动更健康市场竞争的努力。一种被广泛采用的方法是要求平台之间进行某种程度的互操作性，以缓解当前最大的公司在权力上的集中。不出所料，互操作性倡议通常受到大科技公司抵制。更令人惊讶的是，这种抵制的很大一部分是以安全为名——即基于互操作性会损害安全来反对互操作性。我们对“安全 vs 互操作性”（SvI）在欧盟反垄断程序中的讨论进行了系统性研究。我们的贡献有三个方面。首先，我们提出了SvI担忧的三个类别：工程、审查和混合。其次，我们提出了一个分析框架，用于评估现实中的SvI担忧，并通过分析涵盖我们三个分类的多个案例研究来展示其效用。第三，我们进行了比较分析，突出了经济激励、市场力量和安全之间的相互作用，识别了每个分类中的共同模式。我们的贡献为专家和非专家提供了有价值的分析工具，以批判性地评估当今快速变化的监管环境中SvI讨论。
英文摘要：
Concerns about big tech's monopoly power have featured prominently in recent media and policy discourse, as regulators across the EU, the US, and beyond have ramped up efforts to promote healthier market competition. One favored approach is to require certain kinds of interoperation between platforms, to mitigate the current concentration of power in the biggest companies. Unsurprisingly, interoperability initiatives have generally been met with resistance by big tech companies. Perhaps more surprisingly, a significant part of that pushback has been in the name of security -- that is, arguing against interoperation on the basis that it will undermine security. We conduct a systematic examination of "security vs. interoperability" (SvI) discourse in the context of EU antitrust proceedings. Our resulting contributions are threefold. First, we propose a taxonomy of SvI concerns in three categories: engineering, vetting, and hybrid. Second, we present an analytical framework for assessing real-world SvI concerns, and illustrate its utility by analyzing several case studies spanning our three taxonomy categories. Third, we undertake a comparative analysis that highlights key considerations around the interplay of economic incentives, market power, and security across our diverse case study contexts, identifying common patterns in each taxonomy category. Our contributions provide valuable analytical tools for experts and non-experts alike to critically assess SvI discourse in today's fast-paced regulatory landscape.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
