As technology professionals assume greater privacy responsibilities, our updated certification keeps up with the latest developments by incorporating 50% new content. It is the first certification to verify compliance with stringent requirements for knowledge, skill, proficiency, and ethics in privacy law. Additionally, it is one of the newest accredited specialties by the ABA. The IAPP's CIPP/E and CIPM certifications, both ANSI/ISO-accredited, are the industry-recognized combination for GDPR readiness. Discover more about these certifications today. The Privacy Risk Study conducted by the IAPP in collaboration with KPMG represents the most comprehensive examination of privacy risk to date. Furthermore, the IAPP's US State Privacy Legislation Tracker contains a compilation of proposed and enacted comprehensive state privacy bills from across the United States. On this specific page, you will find the IAPP's collection of coverage, analysis, and resources regarding the relationship between AI and privacy. For those in Europe, the IAPP's EU General Data Protection Regulation page is a valuable resource that gathers guidance, analysis, tools, and resources necessary to ensure compliance with your obligations. Additionally, we are excited to announce a new event targeted towards business leaders, technology professionals, and privacy experts working with AI. Attend this event to gain insights into practical AI governance, accountability, fairness testing, and more. Europe's leading experts offer pragmatic insights into the evolving privacy landscape and provide knowledge on best practices for data protection operations. On a related note, the U. S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law recently held a probing hearing on artificial intelligence. The hearing featured prominent AI academics and the founder of a public benefit AI research company, each of whom offered suggestions for potential AI regulation across various applications. As a follow-up to the previous hearing in May, Subcommittee Chair Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. , emphasized the objective of the latest meeting was to "lay the ground for (AI) legislation" and develop enforceable laws. During the hearing, panelists addressed a range of legal and national security concerns associated with AI development, including individual privacy harms and global security issues. Yoshua Bengio, the founder and Scientific Director of the Montreal Institute for Learning Algorithms, expressed concerns that AI will soon achieve human-level intelligence, creating a sense of urgency to establish technical and legal frameworks to prevent the rise of "rogue" AI models.

Bengio stressed that proper regulation could significantly reduce the probability of such risks. Dario Amodei, the CEO and co-founder of Anthropic, classified AI risks into short, medium, and long-term categories. He highlighted short-term risks such as bias, privacy, and misinformation, while long-term risks involved the potential threat to humanity from fully autonomous AI models. Amodei's company, along with six other Big Tech firms, recently made a voluntary commitment to conduct security testing of their AI systems before commercial use. Blumenthal, in his opening remarks, deemed voluntary commitments from Big Tech insufficient to prevent negative outcomes. He emphasized the need for regulatory oversight by a new federal agency due to the relentless advance of AI technology. Amodei added that any regulation or federal agency should have the authority to assess risks associated with AI models. To address criminal misuse of AI, Bengio suggested implementing criminal penalties for counterfeiting a person's voice, image, or name. Hawley asked the witnesses what legislative actions Congress should undertake promptly, and they unanimously recommended the establishment of a federal regulatory agency dedicated to AI. University of California Computer Science professor Stuart Russell additionally supported required third-party testing, a licensing regime, and the creation of an international coordinating body. Russell stressed the importance of analytic predictability and recommended systems that break the rules be recalled from the market, ranging from defaming individuals to aiding terrorists. He emphasized the necessity of going beyond voluntary steps to ensure safe AI development. Bengio highlighted the government's role in structuring incentives for safe AI systems and aligning them with agreed values and norms. He emphasized the criticality of considering access, alignment, intellectual power, and scope of actions when assessing risks and designing government interventions. Amodei emphasized the need for comprehensive testing and auditing regimes for AI models and expressed openness to various administrative mechanisms that would ensure the safety of AI. With the increasing attention on AI, several federal privacy bills have been introduced or proposed in 2023, which adds complexity and uncertainty to the legislative and regulatory landscape. While legislative and regulatory trends related to AI are evolving, it is challenging to predict future oversight requirements. Nonetheless, it is clear that vendors of AI-based systems must prioritize governance measures. As a reliable and comprehensive global information privacy community and resource, the IAPP is here to support privacy professionals in navigating the complex data-driven world. Consider becoming a member today to access our extensive array of benefits.