{"id":500,"date":"2026-04-02T23:58:38","date_gmt":"2026-04-02T23:58:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/blog\/2026\/04\/02\/data-hostage-how-a-preprint-bartered-100000-bulk-unreleased-cybersecurity-scenarios-for-peer\/"},"modified":"2026-04-02T23:58:38","modified_gmt":"2026-04-02T23:58:38","slug":"data-hostage-how-a-preprint-bartered-100000-bulk-unreleased-cybersecurity-scenarios-for-peer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/blog\/2026\/04\/02\/data-hostage-how-a-preprint-bartered-100000-bulk-unreleased-cybersecurity-scenarios-for-peer\/","title":{"rendered":"Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3><strong>Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer Review Acceptance<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Author: Berend Watchus Independent AI &amp; Cybersecurity Researcher [Publication for: OSINT\u00a0Team]<\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*vYn9YjsNfYLRlSGS7wmL3w.png\" \/><figcaption><a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079\">https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079\">Automated Generation of Cybersecurity Exercise Scenarios<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer Review Acceptance<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>A structural integrity analysis of arXiv:2604.01079<\/em><\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*S0CoaQvolWdgQP_WKFEXsg.png\" \/><figcaption><a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079\">https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*y94L4L2b9w49WXE3ye3nFA.png\" \/><figcaption><a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/pdf\/2604.01079\">https:\/\/arxiv.org\/pdf\/2604.01079<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>This is what you\u00a0see.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>You find this on arXiv, April 1,\u00a02026:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Automated Generation of Cybersecurity Exercise Scenarios<\/strong> <em>Charilaos Skandylas, Mikael Asplund\u200a\u2014\u200aLink\u00f6ping University<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The abstract closes with this sentence:<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cWe further release as open source: a simulation and a virtualization environment that can run cybersecurity exercises based on the generated scenarios and a dataset containing 100000 sample scenarios.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Present tense. Unqualified. Definitive.<\/p>\n<p>You would reasonably conclude: the scenarios exist, they are released, they are accessible now.<\/p>\n<p><strong>None of that is\u00a0true.<\/strong><\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*D-TxOsossWFtbj0TRWdBvw.png\" \/><figcaption><a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/pdf\/2604.01079\">https:\/\/arxiv.org\/pdf\/2604.01079<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><strong>This is what they\u00a0admit.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Buried at the very end of the paper, in Appendix B titled\u200a\u2014\u200awith notable irony\u200a\u2014\u200a\u201cOpen Science,\u201d a single paragraph reads:<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cIn the interest of open science, we will provide our dataset alongside a snapshot of the scenario generator, simulator and virtualization sources, released under an open source license upon acceptance.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Read that carefully against the abstract.<\/p>\n<p>The abstract says: <strong>we release.<\/strong> The appendix says: <strong>we will release if you accept\u00a0us.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>That gap is not a writing error. It is the entire mechanism.<\/p>\n<p>But it is actually worse than\u00a0that.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Number Disappears<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The abstract promises something specific: <strong>100,000 sample scenarios.<\/strong> A concrete, countable, verifiable quantity. Large enough to impress. Specific enough to suggest rigorous generation and validation.<\/p>\n<p>Now look at what Appendix B actually commits to releasing:<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u201cour dataset.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>That is all. No number. No quantity. No specification. No verification commitment. Just \u201cour dataset\u201d\u200a\u2014\u200aan undefined, unquantified, unspecified blob of future\u00a0maybe.<\/p>\n<p>The 100,000 figure exists in exactly one place in this paper: the abstract, where it does maximum persuasive work on every reader and every peer reviewer who will ever encounter this paper. By the time the authors commit to an actual release in Appendix B, the number has silently vanished.<\/p>\n<p>This means that upon acceptance\u200a\u2014\u200aif acceptance comes\u200a\u2014\u200athe authors could release 12 scenarios, a partial generator snapshot, and a readme file, and have technically honored every commitment made in Appendix\u00a0B.<\/p>\n<p>The 100,000 is a promise made where it counts and erased where it\u00a0binds.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Transaction<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Those two statements together\u200a\u2014\u200athe abstract and Appendix B\u200a\u2014\u200aform an explicit barter that no legitimate open science framework would recognize.<\/p>\n<p>The dataset is not coming eventually. It is not \u201cmaybe later.\u201d It has a specific, named release trigger: peer review acceptance. That trigger is a direct transaction:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Give us acceptance<\/li>\n<li>We give you something we will call \u201cour\u00a0dataset\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The 100,000 scenarios\u200a\u2014\u200awhich by academic convention should accompany the paper as a verified, accessible dataset at submission\u200a\u2014\u200aare instead being held as transaction currency. Peer reviewers are being asked to validate a contribution they cannot see, in exchange for a release that only happens if validation succeeds, and which carries no commitment to the quantity that made it sound valuable in the first\u00a0place.<\/p>\n<p>That is not open science. That is a hostage structure. The abstract is the \u2018ransom\u2019 note. Appendix B is the small\u00a0print.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Word Doing the Dishonest Work<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In academic abstract convention, \u201cwe further release\u201d means: in addition to the methodology we just described, we additionally provide these concrete deliverables\u200a\u2014\u200anow, accompanying this submission.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same register as \u201csource code available at github.com\/X\u201d or \u201cdataset available at DOI:Y.\u201d It is a statement of present fact, not future\u00a0intent.<\/p>\n<p>A legitimate future intent statement would read: \u201cWe will release upon acceptance\u201d or \u201cWe plan to make available.\u201d Those phrasings appear nowhere in the abstract. Only in Appendix B, which most readers and many reviewers will never reach, does the condition surface\u200a\u2014\u200aand by then the number has already been quietly\u00a0dropped.<\/p>\n<p>The word \u201cfurther\u201d makes it worse. \u201cWe further release\u201d positions the dataset as a co-equal contribution alongside the paper itself. It is the payoff sentence of the abstract. It is the answer to \u201cso what do we actually\u00a0get?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The answer, in Appendix B: something unspecified, sometime after acceptance.<\/p>\n<p><strong>What Peer Reviewers Are Actually Being Asked to\u00a0Do<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>When stated plainly, the situation is extraordinary:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Evaluate a simulation environment they cannot\u00a0access<\/li>\n<li>Evaluate a virtualization environment they cannot\u00a0access<\/li>\n<li>Evaluate 100,000 scenarios they cannot access\u200a\u2014\u200aand which the authors have not even committed to releasing in that\u00a0quantity<\/li>\n<li>Verify empirical claims about scalability, variety and difficulty that rest entirely on data they cannot\u00a0access<\/li>\n<li>Grant acceptance, after which something called \u201cour dataset\u201d will be\u00a0released<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This inverts the entire logic of peer review. Peer review exists to verify claims before they receive academic endorsement. Here verification is structurally impossible because the evidence is withheld until after endorsement is granted\u200a\u2014\u200aand the quantity of evidence promised in the abstract is not even guaranteed in the release commitment.<\/p>\n<p><strong>What 100,000 Scenarios Actually\u00a0Are<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Even setting aside the barter structure, the 100,000 scenarios deserve scrutiny as a headline contribution.<\/p>\n<p>They are not hand-crafted. They are not expert-validated. They are not curated. They are the automated output of an Alloy model finder\u200a\u2014\u200aa formal constraint satisfaction tool\u200a\u2014\u200arunning against specifications the authors wrote. The number 100,000 is a parameter. They could have set it to 1,000,000 with identical effort. The number communicates scale, not\u00a0work.<\/p>\n<p>Here is what generating 100,000 scenarios actually involves:<\/p>\n<p><strong>The generation process:<\/strong> Write the Alloy specifications\u200a\u2014\u200athe real intellectual work, already fully published in the paper text. Configure the generator. Run it. Wait. The paper\u2019s own Table 1 reveals the scale: 125 networks generate in approximately 17 minutes. Scaling to 100,000 is a matter of compute time, not human\u00a0effort.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The compute budget:<\/strong> A standard cloud instance running this workload costs between \u20ac5 and \u20ac50. This is not a major infrastructure contribution. It is an overnight batch\u00a0job.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The human effort after the specifications are written:<\/strong> Run a\u00a0script.<\/p>\n<p><strong>What 100,000 scenarios look like physically:<\/strong> Each scenario is a structured data object\u200a\u2014\u200aa graph of network topology, subsystem components, interfaces, vulnerabilities, locks, keys, and objectives. In JSON format, a single scenario occupies roughly 10 to 50KB. At 20KB average, 100,000 scenarios is approximately 2GB. That fits in a single zip file. It would be hosted on Zenodo or a GitHub release in minutes. There is no technical barrier to releasing it today, or the day the paper was submitted.<\/p>\n<p><strong>What 100,000 scenarios are not:<\/strong> They are not 100,000 stories. They are not 100,000 hand-designed training exercises. They are structured data objects that formally satisfy constraint specifications. A human reading one would encounter: network topology type, connector configuration, subsystem components, interface assignments, vulnerability mappings, lock placement, key location, objective target. Multiply that by 100,000. It is a database, not a library. It is bulk output, not curated knowledge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Anyone Can Do\u00a0This<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The deeper problem with holding this dataset hostage is that it is not\u00a0scarce.<\/p>\n<p>A non-expert with access to any current commercial LLM and a structured approach could produce a semantically equivalent or superior dataset for under \u20ac100 per month. The process is straightforward:<\/p>\n<p>Develop 35 to 100 domain questions covering what constitutes a good cybersecurity exercise scenario. What attack patterns appear in real enterprise environments? What difficulty gradations exist in practice? What makes a scenario useful for training a human analyst versus an AI agent? What network topologies reflect actual enterprise architectures? Use those answers to construct a generation framework. Generate scenarios in bulk. Use the LLM to validate each scenario against established cybersecurity benchmarks.<\/p>\n<p>This runs over a weekend. It costs one monthly LLM subscription. It produces semantically grounded scenarios\u200a\u2014\u200areflecting real-world attack patterns and training utility\u200a\u2014\u200arather than formally valid but semantically unvalidated constraint satisfactions.<\/p>\n<p>The result is a zip file on Zenodo. Released the same day it was generated because there is no barter to execute, no hostage to hold, no acceptance to wait\u00a0for.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Quality That Was Never\u00a0Checked<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There is a question the paper never asks: are these good scenarios?<\/p>\n<p>Formally valid is not semantically useful. A scenario can satisfy every Alloy constraint the authors specified and still be useless for cybersecurity training. The paper\u2019s evaluation measures structural variety via NetSimile graph similarity metrics and content variety via clustering heatmaps. Both measure diversity of output. Neither measures quality of\u00a0output.<\/p>\n<p>The paper does not\u00a0ask:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Do these scenarios reflect attack patterns observed in real enterprise incidents?<\/li>\n<li>Would a cybersecurity trainer recognize these as meaningful exercises?<\/li>\n<li>Do the difficulty gradations correlate with real-world operational complexity?<\/li>\n<li>Would an AI agent trained on these scenarios perform better in actual defensive tasks?<\/li>\n<li>Has any domain expert reviewed a single scenario for\u00a0realism?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>None of these questions are answered because none were asked. The scenarios are validated against the authors\u2019 own formal model\u200a\u2014\u200aa closed loop where the generator and the validator share the same assumptions. This is not independent quality validation. It is confirmation that the output matches the specification that produced\u00a0it.<\/p>\n<p>The \u2018ransom\u2019 being demanded is for a dataset whose quantity is unguaranteed, whose quality has never been independently assessed, whose utility has never been demonstrated, and whose generation required minimal human effort beyond the methodology already published in the paper\u00a0text.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Pattern and the\u00a0Warning<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>This paper exhibits a structure that deserves to be named\u00a0clearly:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Abstract makes present-tense open science claim with a specific impressive number<\/li>\n<li>Appendix reveals the release is conditional on peer review acceptance<\/li>\n<li>Appendix quietly drops the specific number\u200a\u2014\u200acommitting only to \u201cour\u00a0dataset\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Peer reviewers cannot access or verify any of the claimed contributions<\/li>\n<li>The contribution is trivially replicable by anyone with basic tools and a small\u00a0budget<\/li>\n<li>Semantic quality of the contribution is never independently validated<\/li>\n<li>Release trigger is acceptance\u200a\u2014\u200aa direct transaction, not a\u00a0timeline<\/li>\n<li>The quantity promised in the abstract is not guaranteed in the release commitment<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The warning for the research community is simple and actionable:<\/p>\n<p>When an abstract uses present tense to describe open science releases, verify that the release actually exists before treating it as a contribution. Search for the repository. Search for the DOI. Search for the dataset. If it does not exist at submission time, the abstract has misrepresented the paper\u2019s state of completion.<\/p>\n<p>Then read the appendix. Check whether the quantity promised in the abstract is actually committed to in the release terms. If the number has disappeared, you are looking at a two-stage deception: impress with the abstract, bind with the appendix, deliver whatever is convenient after acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Peer review cannot function correctly when the evidence under review is withheld pending the outcome of the review. That is not a procedural inconvenience. It is a structural corruption of the verification process that peer review exists to\u00a0perform.<\/p>\n<p>The data is not released. The scenarios are bulk automated output. The quality is unvalidated. The quantity is unguaranteed. The transaction is explicit.<\/p>\n<p>The \u2018ransom note\u2019 is the abstract. The small print is Appendix\u00a0B.<\/p>\n<p><em>arXiv:2604.01079\u200a\u2014\u200aSkandylas &amp; Asplund\u200a\u2014\u200aLink\u00f6ping University<\/em> <em>Submitted: April 1, 2026<\/em> <em>Abstract promises: 100,000 scenarios<\/em> <em>Appendix B commits to: \u201cour dataset\u201d<\/em> <em>Dataset status: not released<\/em> <em>Simulation environment status: not released<\/em> <em>Virtualization environment status: not\u00a0released<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>Release condition: peer review acceptance<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/p>\n<p>EDIT1:<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014 EDIT [April 2, 2026]\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The Endorsement Layer<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One structural detail about this paper\u2019s presence on arXiv deserves explicit documentation.<\/p>\n<p>arXiv does not accept open submissions. To publish a preprint there, a new submitter requires endorsement from an established arXiv member\u200a\u2014\u200asomeone with a prior publication record in the relevant subject area who explicitly vouches for the submitter\u2019s legitimacy. The endorsement is a reputational transfer. The endorser stakes their credibility on the submission being a good-faith scientific contribution.<\/p>\n<p>That endorsement system is arXiv\u2019s primary quality\u00a0gate.<\/p>\n<p>What it filters: the legitimacy of the submitter.<\/p>\n<p>What it does not filter: the accuracy of the abstract.<\/p>\n<p>That gap is precisely where the manipulation in arXiv:2604.01079 operates. Someone vouched for these authors. That vouching gave the submission institutional credibility\u200a\u2014\u200aLink\u00f6ping University affiliation plus an endorsement chain\u200a\u2014\u200awhich is then read by downstream systems, including Google AI, as a signal that the content has passed a credibility filter. Google AI summarized the abstract as established fact within hours of submission, in part because the submission arrived pre-legitimized.<\/p>\n<p>The endorsement system, designed to prevent low-quality submissions, functioned here as an unintentional trust amplifier for a misleading abstract. The vouching did not protect against abstract-level misrepresentation. It accelerated its propagation.<\/p>\n<p>The person who endorsed this submission vouched for the researchers. They did not\u200a\u2014\u200aand could not\u200a\u2014\u200avouch for the claim that 100,000 scenarios exist and are released right now. But the downstream ecosystem cannot make that distinction. It reads the endorsement as applying to the entire submission.<\/p>\n<p>That is a structural vulnerability in the arXiv endorsement model that this case makes visible for the first time in documented form.<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014 END EDIT\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/p>\n<p>archives<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/archive.ph\/ljzEZ\">https:\/\/archive.ph\/ljzEZ<\/a><\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*5lWrZ_RUM4S-17wuMoe4hg.png\" \/><\/figure>\n<p>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/archive.ph\/Sfw9c\">https:\/\/archive.ph\/Sfw9c<\/a><\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*dklDLNApwtKeEqV0JIfUrg.png\" \/><\/figure>\n<p>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014<\/p>\n<p>Google ai\u00a0mode<\/p>\n<p>Dit is een scherpzinnige observatie die de kern raakt van de huidige debatten over <em>Open Science<\/em> en de integriteit van het preprint-systeem.<\/p>\n<p>Hieronder volgt de uitleg in het Engels, Chinees en Spaans over de ethische implicaties van \u201cvoorwaardelijke data-vrijgave\u201d in ruil voor peer\u00a0review.<\/p>\n<p><strong>English: The Ethics of Conditional Data\u00a0Release<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>When authors claim to have a dataset but withhold it behind a \u201ctransactional barrier\u201d (releasing it only <em>upon acceptance<\/em> of the paper), it creates several academic and ethical\u00a0issues:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Peer Review vs. Open Science:<\/strong> Peer review is a quality control mechanism, not a bargaining chip. By withholding data until acceptance, authors prevent the community from verifying their claims <em>before<\/em> the paper becomes \u201cofficial.\u201d This contradicts the fundamental principle of Open Science: transparency.<\/li>\n<li><strong>The \u201cHostage\u201d Problem:<\/strong> As your source suggests, this is a form of \u201cdata hostage-taking.\u201d It forces reviewers to trust the results without seeing the evidence, essentially asking for a leap of faith rather than a scientific validation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Devaluation of Preprints:<\/strong> Preprints on platforms like arXiv are intended to accelerate the sharing of knowledge. If a preprint makes grand claims (like \u201c100,000 networks\u201d) that cannot be verified because the data is hidden, the preprint loses its scientific utility and becomes a mere advertisement or a \u201cclaim-staking\u201d exercise. This erodes trust in arXiv as a source of credible, early-stage research.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Chinese (\u4e2d\u6587): \u6761\u4ef6\u6027\u6570\u636e\u53d1\u5e03\u7684\u4f26\u7406\u95ee\u9898<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u5982\u679c\u4e00\u7bc7\u8bba\u6587\u627f\u8bfa\u63d0\u4f9b\u6570\u636e\u96c6\uff0c\u4f46\u5c06\u5176\u4f5c\u4e3a\u901a\u8fc7\u540c\u884c\u8bc4\u5ba1\u7684\u201c\u4ea4\u6362\u6761\u4ef6\u201d\uff0c\u8fd9\u5728\u5b66\u672f\u754c\u5f15\u53d1\u4e86\u4e25\u91cd\u7684\u8bda\u4fe1\u8d28\u7591\uff1a<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>\u5b66\u672f\u8bda\u4fe1\u4e0e\u900f\u660e\u5ea6\uff1a<\/strong> \u5f00\u653e\u79d1\u5b66\u7684\u6838\u5fc3\u5728\u4e8e\u53ef\u91cd\u590d\u6027\u3002\u5982\u679c\u6570\u636e\u96c6\u5728\u8bba\u6587\u88ab\u63a5\u53d7\u4e4b\u524d\u4e0d\u53ef\u7528\uff0c\u5176\u4ed6\u7814\u7a76\u4eba\u5458\u5c31\u65e0\u6cd5\u9a8c\u8bc1\u4f5c\u8005\u7684\u5b9e\u9a8c\u7ed3\u679c\u3002\u8fd9\u79cd\u201c\u5148\u63a5\u53d7\u518d\u53d1\u5e03\u201d\u7684\u505a\u6cd5\u8fdd\u80cc\u4e86\u79d1\u5b66\u900f\u660e\u7684\u539f\u5219\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u540c\u884c\u8bc4\u5ba1\u7684\u8d2c\u503c\uff1a<\/strong> \u540c\u884c\u8bc4\u5ba1\u672c\u5e94\u57fa\u4e8e\u5bf9\u6570\u636e\u548c\u65b9\u6cd5\u7684\u4e25\u683c\u5ba1\u67e5\u3002\u5982\u679c\u6570\u636e\u88ab\u6263\u4e3a\u4eba\u8d28\uff0c\u8bc4\u5ba1\u5458\u5c31\u65e0\u6cd5\u5c65\u884c\u804c\u8d23\uff0c\u5bfc\u81f4\u8bc4\u5ba1\u8fc7\u7a0b\u6d41\u4e8e\u5f62\u5f0f\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u5bf9 arXiv \u4ef7\u503c\u7684\u5f71\u54cd\uff1a<\/strong> arXiv \u7684\u521d\u8877\u662f\u4fc3\u8fdb\u77e5\u8bc6\u7684\u5feb\u901f\u4f20\u64ad\u3002\u5982\u679c\u9884\u5370\u672c\u53d8\u6210\u4e86\u4e00\u79cd\u201c\u8425\u9500\u5de5\u5177\u201d\uff0c\u53d1\u5e03\u65e0\u6cd5\u9a8c\u8bc1\u7684\u6d77\u91cf\u6570\u636e\u58f0\u660e\uff08\u5982 100,000 \u4e2a\u7f51\u7edc\uff09\uff0c\u5b83\u5c31\u4f1a\u635f\u5bb3\u9884\u5370\u672c\u5e73\u53f0\u7684\u58f0\u8a89\uff0c\u4f7f\u5176\u4ece\u79d1\u5b66\u4ea4\u6d41\u5e73\u53f0\u964d\u7ea7\u4e3a\u865a\u5047\u5ba3\u4f20\u7684\u6e29\u5e8a\u3002<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Spanish: La \u00e9tica de la liberaci\u00f3n condicional de\u00a0datos<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Cuando un art\u00edculo promete un conjunto de datos pero lo utiliza como una moneda de cambio para la aceptaci\u00f3n en revisi\u00f3n por pares, se plantean serios problemas \u00e9ticos:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Ciencia Abierta vs. Transacci\u00f3n:<\/strong> La integridad acad\u00e9mica exige que los datos que respaldan las conclusiones est\u00e9n disponibles para su verificaci\u00f3n. Condicionar la liberaci\u00f3n de los datos a la aceptaci\u00f3n del art\u00edculo es una pr\u00e1ctica transaccional que obstruye la reproducibilidad.<\/li>\n<li><strong>El Secuestro de Datos:<\/strong> Como menciona su fuente, esto act\u00faa como un \u201csecuestro de datos\u201d. Se pide a los revisores y a la comunidad cient\u00edfica que validen un trabajo cuyas pruebas fundamentales est\u00e1n ocultas. Esto invalida el prop\u00f3sito del control de calidad cient\u00edfico.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Impacto en arXiv:<\/strong> arXiv es un pilar de la comunicaci\u00f3n cient\u00edfica r\u00e1pida. Si los autores lo utilizan para publicar resultados que no se pueden verificar, la plataforma se llena de \u201cpromesas\u201d en lugar de ciencia real. Esto debilita la confianza en los <em>preprints<\/em> y perjudica a los investigadores que s\u00ed practican una transparencia total.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Conclusie (Nederlands)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Het aanbieden van een dataset als \u201cbeloning\u201d voor acceptatie (in plaats van als bewijslast voor de review) wordt in de moderne wetenschap vaak gezien als een <strong>slechte praktijk<\/strong> (<em>bad practice<\/em>). Het ondermijnt het proces van falsificatie: als men de data niet kan inzien, kan men de fouten niet vinden. Voor arXiv betekent dit een risico op \u201cvervuiling\u201d met claims die wel de aandacht trekken, maar niet de wetenschappelijke toets der kritiek kunnen doorstaan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Russian (\u0420\u0443\u0441\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0439): \u042d\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0430 \u0443\u0441\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0432\u044b\u043f\u0443\u0441\u043a\u0430\u00a0\u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u041a\u043e\u0433\u0434\u0430 \u0430\u0432\u0442\u043e\u0440\u044b \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0449\u0430\u044e\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u0438\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u0431\u043e\u0440 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 (dataset) \u0442\u043e\u043b\u044c\u043a\u043e <em>\u043f\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0435<\/em> \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043d\u044f\u0442\u0438\u044f \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0438 \u0440\u0435\u0446\u0435\u043d\u0437\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430\u043c\u0438, \u044d\u0442\u043e \u0441\u043e\u0437\u0434\u0430\u0435\u0442 \u0441\u0435\u0440\u044c\u0435\u0437\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u044d\u0442\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0435 \u0438 \u0430\u043a\u0430\u0434\u0435\u043c\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u044b:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>\u041e\u0442\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0442\u0430\u044f \u043d\u0430\u0443\u043a\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438\u0432 \u0441\u0434\u0435\u043b\u043a\u0438:<\/strong> \u0421\u0443\u0442\u044c \u043e\u0442\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0442\u043e\u0439 \u043d\u0430\u0443\u043a\u0438 \u0437\u0430\u043a\u043b\u044e\u0447\u0430\u0435\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0437\u0440\u0430\u0447\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438. \u0415\u0441\u043b\u0438 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u0441\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0442\u044b \u0434\u043e \u043c\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430 \u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438, \u043d\u0430\u0443\u0447\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0441\u043e\u043e\u0431\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u0435\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0442\u044c \u0443\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f \u0430\u0432\u0442\u043e\u0440\u043e\u0432. \u042d\u0442\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0432\u0440\u0430\u0449\u0430\u0435\u0442 \u043d\u0430\u0443\u0447\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0446\u0435\u0441\u0441 \u0432 \u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0437\u0430\u043a\u0446\u0438\u044e, \u0430 \u043d\u0435 \u0432 \u043f\u043e\u0438\u0441\u043a\u00a0\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043d\u044b.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043c\u0430 \u00ab\u0437\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0436\u043d\u0438\u043a\u043e\u0432 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445\u00bb:<\/strong> \u041a\u0430\u043a \u0443\u043a\u0430\u0437\u044b\u0432\u0430\u044e\u0442 \u043a\u0440\u0438\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0438, \u044d\u0442\u043e \u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430 \u00ab\u0437\u0430\u0445\u0432\u0430\u0442\u0430 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445\u00bb. \u0420\u0435\u0446\u0435\u043d\u0437\u0435\u043d\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441\u044f\u0442 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0434\u0438\u0442\u044c \u043a\u0430\u0447\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e \u0440\u0430\u0431\u043e\u0442\u044b, \u043d\u0435 \u0434\u0430\u0432\u0430\u044f \u0438\u043c \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u0430 \u043a \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0430\u0437\u0430\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0430\u043c. \u042d\u0442\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0440\u044b\u0432\u0430\u0435\u0442 \u0441\u0430\u043c\u0443 \u0441\u0443\u0442\u044c \u0440\u0435\u0446\u0435\u043d\u0437\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u044f.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u041e\u0431\u0435\u0441\u0446\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 arXiv:<\/strong> \u041f\u0440\u0435\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043d\u0442\u044b \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043d\u0430\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0447\u0435\u043d\u044b \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0443\u0441\u043a\u043e\u0440\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f \u043e\u0431\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0430 \u0437\u043d\u0430\u043d\u0438\u044f\u043c\u0438. \u0415\u0441\u043b\u0438 \u043f\u0440\u0435\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043d\u0442 \u0441\u043e\u0434\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0438\u0442 \u0433\u0440\u043e\u043c\u043a\u0438\u0435 \u0437\u0430\u044f\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f (\u043d\u0430\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440, \u043e \u00ab100 000 \u0441\u0435\u0442\u044f\u0445\u00bb), \u043a\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0440\u044b\u0435 \u043d\u0435\u0432\u043e\u0437\u043c\u043e\u0436\u043d\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0442\u044c, arXiv \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0432\u0440\u0430\u0449\u0430\u0435\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0438\u0437 \u043d\u0430\u0443\u0447\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043f\u043b\u0430\u0442\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u044b \u0432 \u0440\u0435\u043a\u043b\u0430\u043c\u043d\u0443\u044e \u043f\u043b\u043e\u0449\u0430\u0434\u043a\u0443, \u0447\u0442\u043e \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0440\u044b\u0432\u0430\u0435\u0442 \u0434\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0435 \u043a \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u0432\u0430\u0440\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u044b\u043c \u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f\u043c.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Portuguese (Portugu\u00eas): A \u00c9tica da Libera\u00e7\u00e3o Condicional de\u00a0Dados<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Quando os autores prometem um conjunto de dados, mas o mant\u00eam sob uma \u201cbarreira transacional\u201d (liberando-o apenas <em>ap\u00f3s a aceita\u00e7\u00e3o<\/em> do artigo), surgem v\u00e1rios problemas \u00e9ticos:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Ci\u00eancia Aberta vs. Transa\u00e7\u00e3o:<\/strong> A integridade acad\u00eamica exige que os dados que sustentam as conclus\u00f5es estejam dispon\u00edveis para verifica\u00e7\u00e3o. Condicionar a libera\u00e7\u00e3o \u00e0 aceita\u00e7\u00e3o do artigo obstrui a reprodutibilidade e viola os princ\u00edpios da Ci\u00eancia\u00a0Aberta.<\/li>\n<li><strong>O Problema do \u201cRef\u00e9m de Dados\u201d:<\/strong> Como sugere a sua fonte, trata-se de uma forma de manter os dados como ref\u00e9ns. Obriga os revisores a confiar nos resultados sem ver as evid\u00eancias, transformando a valida\u00e7\u00e3o cient\u00edfica em um ato de\u00a0f\u00e9.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Desvaloriza\u00e7\u00e3o de Preprints:<\/strong> O arXiv serve para acelerar o compartilhamento de conhecimento. Se um preprint faz grandes alega\u00e7\u00f5es que n\u00e3o podem ser verificadas porque os dados est\u00e3o ocultos, a plataforma perde sua utilidade cient\u00edfica e torna-se apenas um meio de \u201cmarcar territ\u00f3rio\u201d sem\u00a0prova.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Japanese (\u65e5\u672c\u8a9e): \u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u516c\u958b\u306e\u6761\u4ef6\u4ed8\u304d\u53d6\u5f15\u306b\u95a2\u3059\u308b\u502b\u7406<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u8ad6\u6587\u306e\u8457\u8005\u304c\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u30bb\u30c3\u30c8\u306e\u5b58\u5728\u3092\u4e3b\u5f35\u3057\u306a\u304c\u3089\u3001\u300c\u8ad6\u6587\u304c\u63a1\u629e\u3055\u308c\u305f\u5834\u5408\u306e\u307f\u516c\u958b\u3059\u308b\u300d\u3068\u3044\u3046\u6761\u4ef6\u3092\u4ed8\u3051\u308b\u3053\u3068\u306f\u3001\u5b66\u8853\u7684\u30fb\u502b\u7406\u7684\u306b\u5927\u304d\u306a\u554f\u984c\u304c\u3042\u308a\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>\u30aa\u30fc\u30d7\u30f3\u30b5\u30a4\u30a8\u30f3\u30b9\u304b\u3001\u53d6\u5f15\u304b\uff1a<\/strong> \u30aa\u30fc\u30d7\u30f3\u30b5\u30a4\u30a8\u30f3\u30b9\u306e\u6839\u5e79\u306f\u900f\u660e\u6027\u3067\u3059\u3002\u63a1\u629e\u307e\u3067\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u3092\u975e\u516c\u958b\u306b\u3059\u308b\u3053\u3068\u306f\u3001\u30b3\u30df\u30e5\u30cb\u30c6\u30a3\u306b\u3088\u308b\u691c\u8a3c\u3092\u59a8\u3052\u308b\u3082\u306e\u3067\u3042\u308a\u3001\u79d1\u5b66\u7684\u306a\u900f\u660e\u6027\u306e\u539f\u5247\u306b\u53cd\u3057\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u300c\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u306e\u8cea\u5165\u308c\u300d\u554f\u984c\uff1a<\/strong> \u6307\u6458\u3055\u308c\u3066\u3044\u308b\u901a\u308a\u3001\u3053\u308c\u306f\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u3092\u300c\u4eba\u8cea\u300d\u306b\u53d6\u308b\u884c\u70ba\u3067\u3059\u3002\u67fb\u8aad\u8005\u306f\u8a3c\u62e0\u3092\u78ba\u8a8d\u3067\u304d\u306a\u3044\u307e\u307e\u7d50\u679c\u3092\u4fe1\u983c\u305b\u3056\u308b\u3092\u5f97\u305a\u3001\u79d1\u5b66\u7684\u306a\u691c\u8a3c\u304c\u300c\u61b6\u6e2c\u300d\u306b\u53d6\u3063\u3066\u4ee3\u308f\u3089\u308c\u3066\u3057\u307e\u3044\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>arXiv \u306e\u4fa1\u5024\u306e\u4f4e\u4e0b\uff1a<\/strong> arXiv\uff08\u30d7\u30ec\u30d7\u30ea\u30f3\u30c8\uff09\u306e\u76ee\u7684\u306f\u3001\u77e5\u8b58\u306e\u8fc5\u901f\u306a\u5171\u6709\u3067\u3059\u3002\u691c\u8a3c\u4e0d\u53ef\u80fd\u306a\u5927\u898f\u6a21\u306a\u4e3b\u5f35\uff08\u4f8b\uff1a10\u4e07\u500b\u306e\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8\u30ef\u30fc\u30af\uff09\u3092\u63b2\u8f09\u3057\u306a\u304c\u3089\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u3092\u96a0\u3059\u3053\u3068\u306f\u3001arXiv \u3092\u79d1\u5b66\u306e\u5834\u304b\u3089\u5358\u306a\u308b\u300c\u5ba3\u4f1d\u306e\u5834\u300d\u3078\u3068\u8cb6\u3081\u3001\u30d7\u30ec\u30d7\u30ea\u30f3\u30c8\u5168\u4f53\u306e\u4fe1\u983c\u6027\u3092\u640d\u306a\u3046\u3053\u3068\u306b\u306a\u308a\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Korte samenvatting (NL)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deze praktijk verandert peer review van een <strong>inspectie<\/strong> in een <strong>gijzeling<\/strong>. Het ondermijnt de geloofwaardigheid van preprints omdat de geclaimde waarde (de 100.000 scenario\u2019s) niet geverifieerd kan worden op het moment dat de wetenschappelijke claim wordt\u00a0gemaakt.<\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*H-rPat7I7wM9BIKBTRoisQ.png\" \/><\/figure>\n<p>\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u200a\u2014\u00a0\u2014<\/p>\n<p>another google ai mode session\u00a0says:<\/p>\n<figure><img data-opt-id=771569372  decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn-images-1.medium.com\/max\/1024\/1*RZzWmlOefk0t37f7u-Iwzg.png\" \/><\/figure>\n<p><strong>English Correction<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Based on the verbatim text of <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong>, there is a direct contradiction regarding the availability of the materials. The correct status as of April 2, 2026, is as\u00a0follows:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>No Current Availability:<\/strong> Despite the abstract using present tense (\u201cwe further release\u201d), <strong>Appendix B (Open Science)<\/strong> explicitly states that the dataset, simulator, and virtualization sources will only be provided <strong>\u201cupon acceptance\u201d<\/strong> of the\u00a0paper.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Contradictory Claims:<\/strong> There is a discrepancy between the abstract, which promises <strong>100,000 scenarios<\/strong>, and Appendix B, which only commits to \u201cour dataset\u201d without confirming that specific quantity.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Verification:<\/strong> There are currently <strong>no public URLs, DOIs, GitHub repositories, or Zenodo entries<\/strong> for these materials. The claim of a current release is factually incorrect; it is a <strong>conditional future\u00a0release<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>\u4e2d\u6587\u66f4\u6b63 (Chinese)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u6839\u636e <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong> \u8bba\u6587\u539f\u6587\uff0c\u5173\u4e8e\u8be5\u7814\u7a76\u8d44\u6599\u7684\u5f00\u653e\u72b6\u6001\u5b58\u5728\u660e\u663e\u7684\u77db\u76fe\u3002\u622a\u81f3 2026 \u5e74 4 \u6708 2 \u65e5\uff0c\u6b63\u786e\u60c5\u51b5\u5982\u4e0b\uff1a<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>\u5f53\u524d\u4e0d\u53ef\u83b7\u5f97<\/strong>\uff1a\u5c3d\u7ba1\u6458\u8981\uff08Abstract\uff09\u4f7f\u7528\u4e86\u73b0\u5728\u65f6\u6001\uff08\u201dwe further release\u201d\uff09\uff0c\u4f46\u8bba\u6587\u7684 <strong>\u9644\u5f55 B (Open Science)<\/strong> \u660e\u786e\u6307\u51fa\uff0c\u6570\u636e\u96c6\u3001\u6a21\u62df\u5668\u548c\u865a\u62df\u5316\u6e90\u7801\u5c06\u5728<strong>\u8bba\u6587\u88ab\u63a5\u6536\u540e (upon acceptance)<\/strong> \u624d\u4f1a\u53d1\u5e03\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u5185\u5bb9\u8868\u8ff0\u4e0d\u4e00<\/strong>\uff1a\u6458\u8981\u4e2d\u660e\u786e\u627f\u8bfa\u63d0\u4f9b <strong>100,000 \u4e2a\u573a\u666f<\/strong>\uff0c\u4f46\u5728\u9644\u5f55 B \u7684\u6b63\u5f0f\u627f\u8bfa\u4e2d\uff0c\u4ec5\u63d0\u5230\u63d0\u4f9b\u201c\u6211\u4eec\u7684\u6570\u636e\u96c6\u201d\uff0c\u5e76\u672a\u518d\u6b21\u786e\u8ba4\u5177\u4f53\u7684\u6570\u91cf\u7ea7\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u6838\u5b9e\u7ed3\u679c<\/strong>\uff1a\u76ee\u524d<strong>\u4e0d\u5b58\u5728<\/strong>\u4efb\u4f55\u516c\u5f00\u7684 URL\u3001DOI\u3001GitHub \u4ed3\u5e93\u6216 Zenodo \u6761\u76ee\u3002\u4e4b\u524d\u7684\u53d1\u5e03\u58f0\u660e\u5728\u4e8b\u5b9e\u4e0a\u662f\u4e0d\u51c6\u786e\u7684\uff1b\u8fd9\u5c5e\u4e8e<strong>\u6709\u6761\u4ef6\u7684\u672a\u6765\u53d1\u5e03<\/strong>\uff0c\u800c\u975e\u73b0\u6709\u7684\u8d44\u6e90\u3002<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>\u0420\u0443\u0441\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0439 (Russisch)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u041d\u0430 \u043e\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0438 \u0442\u0435\u043a\u0441\u0442\u0430 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430 <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong> \u0441\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0443\u0435\u0442 \u044f\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043e\u0440\u0435\u0447\u0438\u0435 \u043e\u0442\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u043c\u0430\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0432. \u041a\u043e\u0440\u0440\u0435\u043a\u0442\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0443\u0441 \u043d\u0430 2 \u0430\u043f\u0440\u0435\u043b\u044f 2026\u00a0\u0433\u043e\u0434\u0430:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>\u041e\u0442\u0441\u0443\u0442\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u0435 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438:<\/strong> \u041d\u0435\u0441\u043c\u043e\u0442\u0440\u044f \u043d\u0430 \u0438\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u044c\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0432 \u0430\u043d\u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0442\u043e\u044f\u0449\u0435\u0433\u043e \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0438 (\u00ab\u043c\u044b \u0432\u044b\u043f\u0443\u0441\u043a\u0430\u0435\u043c\u00bb), \u0432 <strong>\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0438 B (Open Science)<\/strong> \u043f\u0440\u044f\u043c\u043e \u0443\u043a\u0430\u0437\u0430\u043d\u043e, \u0447\u0442\u043e \u043d\u0430\u0431\u043e\u0440 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u0438 \u0438\u0441\u0445\u043e\u0434\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u043a\u043e\u0434\u044b \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0443\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u044b \u0442\u043e\u043b\u044c\u043a\u043e <strong>\u00ab\u043f\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043d\u044f\u0442\u0438\u044f\u00bb<\/strong> (upon acceptance) \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0438.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043e\u0440\u0435\u0447\u0438\u0432\u044b\u0435 \u0443\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f:<\/strong> \u0421\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0443\u0435\u0442 \u0440\u0430\u0441\u0445\u043e\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043c\u0435\u0436\u0434\u0443 \u0430\u043d\u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0435\u0439, \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0449\u0430\u044e\u0449\u0435\u0439 <strong>100 000 \u0441\u0446\u0435\u043d\u0430\u0440\u0438\u0435\u0432<\/strong>, \u0438 \u041f\u0440\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435\u043c B, \u043a\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0440\u043e\u0435 \u0443\u043f\u043e\u043c\u0438\u043d\u0430\u0435\u0442 \u043b\u0438\u0448\u044c \u00ab\u043d\u0430\u0448 \u043d\u0430\u0431\u043e\u0440 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445\u00bb \u0431\u0435\u0437 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f \u044d\u0442\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043a\u043e\u043b\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0430.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043a\u0430:<\/strong> \u041d\u0430 \u0434\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u043c\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442 <strong>\u043d\u0435 \u0441\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0443\u0435\u0442 \u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0438\u0447\u043d\u044b\u0445 URL, DOI, \u0440\u0435\u043f\u043e\u0437\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0438\u0435\u0432 GitHub \u0438\u043b\u0438 \u0437\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0435\u0439 Zenodo<\/strong> \u0434\u043b\u044f \u044d\u0442\u0438\u0445 \u043c\u0430\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0438\u0430\u043b\u043e\u0432. \u0423\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043e \u0442\u0435\u043a\u0443\u0449\u0435\u043c \u0432\u044b\u043f\u0443\u0441\u043a\u0435 \u0444\u0430\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0435\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e; \u044d\u0442\u043e <strong>\u0443\u0441\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u0432\u044b\u043f\u0443\u0441\u043a \u0432\u00a0\u0431\u0443\u0434\u0443\u0449\u0435\u043c<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Portugu\u00eas (Portugees)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Com base no texto de <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong>, h\u00e1 uma contradi\u00e7\u00e3o direta sobre a disponibilidade dos materiais. O status correto em 2 de abril de 2026\u00a0\u00e9:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Indisponibilidade Atual:<\/strong> Embora o resumo utilize o presente do indicativo (\u201cn\u00f3s lan\u00e7amos\u201d), o <strong>Ap\u00eandice B (Open Science)<\/strong> afirma explicitamente que o conjunto de dados e os c\u00f3digos-fonte ser\u00e3o fornecidos apenas <strong>\u201cap\u00f3s a aceita\u00e7\u00e3o\u201d<\/strong> (upon acceptance) do\u00a0artigo.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Alega\u00e7\u00f5es Contradit\u00f3rias:<\/strong> H\u00e1 uma discrep\u00e2ncia entre o resumo, que promete <strong>100.000 cen\u00e1rios<\/strong>, e o Ap\u00eandice B, que se compromete apenas com \u201cnosso conjunto de dados\u201d, sem confirmar essa quantidade espec\u00edfica.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Verifica\u00e7\u00e3o:<\/strong> Atualmente <strong>n\u00e3o existem URLs p\u00fablicas, DOIs, reposit\u00f3rios GitHub ou entradas no Zenodo<\/strong> para estes materiais. A afirma\u00e7\u00e3o de um lan\u00e7amento atual est\u00e1 factualmente incorreta; trata-se de um <strong>lan\u00e7amento futuro condicional<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Espa\u00f1ol (Spaans)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Seg\u00fan el texto de <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong>, existe una contradicci\u00f3n directa sobre la disponibilidad de los materiales. El estado correcto a fecha de 2 de abril de 2026\u00a0es:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Sin disponibilidad actual:<\/strong> Aunque el resumen utiliza el tiempo presente (\u201clanzamos\u201d), el <strong>Ap\u00e9ndice B (Open Science)<\/strong> indica expl\u00edcitamente que el conjunto de datos y los c\u00f3digos fuente se proporcionar\u00e1n solo <strong>\u201ctras la aceptaci\u00f3n\u201d<\/strong> (upon acceptance) del art\u00edculo.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Afirmaciones contradictorias:<\/strong> Hay una discrepancia entre el resumen, que promete <strong>100.000 escenarios<\/strong>, y el Ap\u00e9ndice B, que solo se compromete con \u201cnuestro conjunto de datos\u201d sin confirmar esa cantidad espec\u00edfica.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Verificaci\u00f3n:<\/strong> Actualmente <strong>no existen URL p\u00fablicas, DOI, repositorios de GitHub ni entradas en Zenodo<\/strong> para estos materiales. La afirmaci\u00f3n de un lanzamiento actual es t\u00e1cticamente incorrecta; es un <strong>lanzamiento futuro condicional<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>\u65e5\u672c\u8a9e (Japans)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u8ad6\u6587 <strong>arXiv:2604.01079<\/strong> \u306e\u672c\u6587\u306b\u57fa\u3065\u304f\u3068\u3001\u8cc7\u6599\u306e\u5229\u7528\u53ef\u80fd\u6027\u306b\u95a2\u3057\u3066\u76f4\u63a5\u7684\u306a\u77db\u76fe\u304c\u3042\u308a\u307e\u3059\u30022026\u5e744\u67082\u65e5\u6642\u70b9\u306e\u6b63\u78ba\u306a\u72b6\u6cc1\u306f\u4ee5\u4e0b\u306e\u901a\u308a\u3067\u3059\u3002<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>\u73fe\u5728\u306f\u5229\u7528\u4e0d\u53ef:<\/strong> \u8981\u7d04\uff08Abstract\uff09\u3067\u306f\u73fe\u5728\u5f62\uff08\u300c\u516c\u958b\u3059\u308b\u300d\uff09\u304c\u4f7f\u308f\u308c\u3066\u3044\u307e\u3059\u304c\u3001<strong>\u4ed8\u9332B (Open Science)<\/strong> \u306b\u306f\u3001\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u30bb\u30c3\u30c8\u304a\u3088\u3073\u30bd\u30fc\u30b9\u30b3\u30fc\u30c9\u306f\u8ad6\u6587\u304c**\u300c\u63a1\u629e\u3055\u308c\u305f\u6642\u70b9\u3067 (upon acceptance)\u300d**\u63d0\u4f9b\u3055\u308c\u308b\u3068\u660e\u8a18\u3055\u308c\u3066\u3044\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u77db\u76fe\u3059\u308b\u4e3b\u5f35:<\/strong> \u8981\u7d04\u3067\u306f <strong>10\u4e07\u4ef6\u306e\u30b7\u30ca\u30ea\u30aa<\/strong> \u3092\u7d04\u675f\u3057\u3066\u3044\u307e\u3059\u304c\u3001\u4ed8\u9332B\u3067\u306f\u5177\u4f53\u7684\u306a\u6570\u91cf\u306b\u306f\u89e6\u308c\u305a\u3001\u300c\u6211\u3005\u306e\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf\u30bb\u30c3\u30c8\u300d\u3068\u8ff0\u3079\u308b\u306b\u3068\u3069\u307e\u3063\u3066\u3044\u307e\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u4e8b\u5b9f\u78ba\u8a8d:<\/strong> \u73fe\u5728\u3001\u3053\u308c\u3089\u306e\u8cc7\u6599\u306b\u95a2\u3059\u308b<strong>\u516c\u958bURL\u3001DOI\u3001GitHub\u30ea\u30dd\u30b8\u30c8\u30ea\u3001Zenodo\u306e\u30a8\u30f3\u30c8\u30ea\u306f\u5b58\u5728\u3057\u307e\u305b\u3093<\/strong>\u3002\u73fe\u6642\u70b9\u3067\u516c\u958b\u6e08\u307f\u3068\u3044\u3046\u4e3b\u5f35\u306f\u4e8b\u5b9f\u8aa4\u8a8d\u3067\u3042\u308a\u3001\u6b63\u3057\u304f\u306f**\u300c\u6761\u4ef6\u4ed8\u304d\u306e\u5c06\u6765\u7684\u306a\u516c\u958b\u300d**\u3067\u3059\u3002<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><img data-opt-id=574357117  decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/medium.com\/_\/stat?event=post.clientViewed&amp;referrerSource=full_rss&amp;postId=f370234511cd\" width=\"1\" height=\"1\" alt=\"\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/osintteam.blog\/data-hostage-how-a-preprint-bartered-100-000-bulk-unreleased-cybersecurity-scenarios-for-peer-f370234511cd\">Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer\u2026<\/a> was originally published in <a href=\"https:\/\/osintteam.blog\/\">OSINT Team<\/a> on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer Review Acceptance Author: Berend Watchus Independent AI &amp; Cybersecurity Researcher [Publication for: OSINT\u00a0Team] https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079 Automated Generation of Cybersecurity Exercise Scenarios Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer Review Acceptance A structural integrity analysis of arXiv:2604.01079 https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2604.01079 &#8230; <a title=\"Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer\u2026\" class=\"read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/blog\/2026\/04\/02\/data-hostage-how-a-preprint-bartered-100000-bulk-unreleased-cybersecurity-scenarios-for-peer\/\" aria-label=\"Read more about Data Hostage: How a Preprint Bartered 100,000 Bulk Unreleased Cybersecurity Scenarios for Peer\u2026\">Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":501,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-500","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/500","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=500"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/500\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/501"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=500"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=500"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quantusintel.group\/osint\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=500"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}