Cerrudo, “An Emerging US (and World) Threat: Cities Wide Open to Cyber Attacks,” White Paper
-To take seriously the arguments of a paper that omits references or draws them from Wikipedia and Amazon is certainly unlikely. As a marketing tool, this white paper presents smartness as synonymous to automation and security, while bugs, glitches, cyber-terrorists or hacktivists pose equally serious dangers to the city (pp.10, 17). The author appears to regard transparency of decision making to be a drawback and presents open data as raw material for attacks (pp.15), yet he seems to reach some conclusions worth considering, such as the need for a fail-safe approach and manual overrides, as well as proper encryption and authentication in software that mediates urban processes. In which ways can digital infrastructure be designed to filter out malicious attacks, but still invite participation? How will this line be drawn and by whom?
-In an attempt to map the attack surface of a smart city, the author applies a deterministic, sequential rhetoric: it all begins with malicious manipulation of information, which creates a false alarm, which causes the wrong behavior change of citizens, which then results at some type of congestion – mobility or energy-wise. Yet, I dare say this effect would mostly appear in u-cities with non-existent legacy organizational systems, as existing cities would probably self-regulate their flows in an alternate way shortly after the disruption – given that their legacy infrastructure would remain in place. How can an analog Plan B be designed for a smart Plan A? What would their common elements consist of?
Townsend, “Buggy, Brittle and Bugged,” Smart Cities: pp.252-281
-As Townsend unfolds the wide spectrum of cyber-sabotage, one may identify that the aftermath is more often than not constructive. In which ways do “zero-day” attacks (pp.267) contribute to the evolution of software by creating links of collaboration between groups of opposing interests? Walking in the shoes of hackers is commonplace for security researchers in their attempt to unveil vulnerabilities [ ex. Beresford of NSS Labs (pp.268), McAfee researchers (pp.269) or Davis of IOActive Labs ( in Cerrudo’s white paper, p.16)]. What are the unlikely perks of cyber-sabotage as a dynamic mechanism for code development?
-As opposed to the demands for decentralization in the 60’s (pp.277), the urban future ahead looks rather centralized according to Glaeser (pp.278). To prevent doomsday scenarios from happening is a bet we cannot afford to lose, but in which ways is a purely centralized strategy more suitable for the task? The potential failures of our cities are complex conglomerations of urban, economic, technological and social parameters. What would the forms of participation and action to address them look like, especially across different scales?