“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by JBorrow on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @07:51AM (#26888367)

That's not really how it works. Nobody's out there 'approving' research (well, not seemingly small projects like this), especially at the university level. Professors (all the way down to PhD students!) are usually left to do what they like, unless there are specific ethical concerns that should be put before a review panel. I suppose you could argue that this work should have been brought before the ethics committee, but it probably wasn't, and in CS there isn't a stringent process like there is in e.g. psychology or biology.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by chromatin on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @08:00AM (#26888432)

Wrong!

If you read the research paper linked in the lkml post, the authors at UMN state that they submitted their research plan to the University of Minnesota Institutional Research Board and received a human subjects exempt waiver.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by gbrown on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @08:23AM (#26888657)

A human subjects determination isn’t really an approval, just a note that the research isn’t HSR, which it sounds like this wasn’t.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by op00to on Thursday April 22, 2021 @12:08PM (#26904385)

It absolutely was human subject research. Try for yourself! Here's the NIH's rubric:

https://grants.nih.gov/policy/humansubjects/hs-decision.htm

for q1, the study collects data like observations of behavior, so we must answer yes.

for q2, none of the exemptions apply - it's not an educational setting, they're not sending a survey, it's not an observation of the public - they're interacting, and it's clear that these interactions are not benign - they have clear impact on the community. None of these exemptions apply.

Based on this flow, it's clear the study involves "human research".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by bluGill on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @09:01AM (#26889085)

Well it was, but not the type of thing that HSR would normally worry about.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by op00to on Thursday April 22, 2021 @12:13PM (#26904462)

That waiver was issued incorrectly. See my post in this same thread on why - essentially, if you do the NIH test, it's HSR.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose” by pdpi on Wednesday April 21, 2021 @08:00AM (#26888439)

The emails suggest this work has been reported in the past. A review by the ethics committee after the fact seems appropriate, and it should’ve stopped a repeat offence.

[ Parent | on HN ]