MDDI 演講稿 · 2025-10-22
楊莉明部長在 AI 高級別小組會議上的開幕致辭
要點
- • 兩項技術在「同一時刻」重塑世界——智慧體 AI（agentic AI）+ 量子計算。兩者都要求我們從「被動監管」轉向「主動準備」。
- • 智慧體 AI 的治理目標 3 條：①以「保障」（assurance）建立信任，不是控制每一個部署；②框架與測試要在真實場景裡相關穩健（要給安全的實驗空間）；③及時行動——不要重蹈數字鴻溝、虛假資訊、網路詐騙的覆轍。
- • 新加坡智慧體 AI 工具棧：GovTech 的「Agentic Risk and Capability Framework」、IMDA 的 AI Verify + Project Moonshot（red-teaming + 基準測試）+ AI Assurance Sandbox + GovTech-Google Cloud 沙盒。原則——「自主越高，保障越強」。
- • 量子安全：CSA 公開諮詢兩份新工具——《量子準備度指數》（Quantum Readiness Index，自評工具）+《量子安全手冊》（Quantum-Safe Handbook）；都視為 MVP 與活文件。
- • 國際協作：AI 與量子都不尊重國界。新加坡—NIST 互通讓公司「測試一次、全球合規」；AI Verify 與 ISO/IEC 42001 / G7 廣島 AI 程序對齊；CSA 與 Google、AWS、TRM Labs 簽署合作備忘錄——Google Play Protect 的增強反欺詐功能截至 2025 年 9 月在新加坡已攔截 622,000 臺裝置上的 278 萬次惡意應用安裝。
完整譯文（繁體中文）
MDDI 英文原文譯文 · 翻譯日期: 2026-05-02
我的內閣同事 Goh Pei Ming 先生，
各位部長、各位閣下，
各位嘉賓，
各位同事與朋友：
歡迎來到「新加坡國際網路周」（SICW）第二天。今天看到這麼多開發者、安全實務者與政策制定者齊聚一堂，我們感到很高興。
我們正生活在一個非凡的科技時刻。兩件事正在我們眼前重塑世界。
第一是「智慧體 AI」（agentic AI）——它不只分析與建議，還會決策與行動。
它們已經能幫我們安排會議、寫並部署程式碼，甚至自動化整段業務運作。
若實施得當——智慧體 AI 很可能成為受歡迎的「隊友」——放大人的能力、把我們從重複勞動中解放、對複雜問題做更快的回應。
但當系統出錯、人失去控制時——也帶來「問責」的問題。
第二是「量子計算」。
這項技術將從根本上改變我們對「信任」的思考——尤其在加密與安全通訊領域。
它在藥物發現、金融建模上的革命效能力讓人期待——但它也可能擊穿現有加密——危及國家安全與商業運作。
兩項技術都帶來巨大承諾——也都帶來嚴肅風險。
更重要的是——兩者都要求我們做出新的姿態：從「被動監管」轉向「主動準備」——因為它們的影響無法被完全預測。
這種轉變可以是我們的志向——但需要集體的意志、智慧與行動——好讓我們在這些技術「治理我們」之前，「治理它們」。
國際掃視
好訊息是——許多國家已經在尋找答案。
在智慧體 AI 上——我們都在角力同一個基本問題：如何治理一個能自主行動的 AI？
歐盟與韓國已經建立全面的 AI 法規——但智慧體 AI 的自主決策能力——給「透明、人類監督」等關鍵要求的落地帶來了實操挑戰。
美國國家標準與技術研究院（NIST）正在為 AI 智慧體開發測試標準——而非規定式規則。
英國的 AI Security Institute 已開發出測試 AI 智慧體的「沙盒工具包」——但「通過測試」是否能保證好行為還不確定——因為智慧體在學習與演化。
在量子領域——也有越來越大的勢能。
聯合國已宣佈 2025 年為「國際量子科學與技術年」——這是國際社會對量子變革潛能的非凡共識。
歐盟啟動「Quantum Europe Strategy」——把科學領先轉為產業實力。
韓國成立「量子戰略委員會」並配以重大資金；日本宣佈 2025 年為「量子產業化元年」。
希望與恐懼共存——人們也擔心量子能力被濫用以擊穿加密、威脅我們數字系統的根基。
我們想知道——如何在「後量子未來」中蓬勃——既駕馭機會、又管理風險。問題是——我們能等多久？
我們的治理目標
作為政策制定者——採取行動時必須對「治理目標」保持清晰。無論是智慧體 AI 還是量子計算——我建議在此節點有 3 個目標。
第一——我們的目標必須是「通過保障建立公民信任」——而不是非要控制 AI 智慧體與量子技術被部署的每一個例項。
良好的治理始於——即便我們不去控制，也要理解風險——並構建工具系統化地管理風險。
我們需要在系統大規模部署之前，就為它們建立測試、驗證與問責的實操框架——一旦部署鋪開，再去補救風險可能就晚了。
第二——我們必須確保框架與測試在真實世界應用中相關而穩健。這就要求提供——配有合適護欄的——「安全實驗空間」。
第三——我們要確保「及時行動」。在多個領域——我們已經知道「行動太晚」的代價是什麼——數字鴻溝、虛假與誤導資訊、線上傷害、詐騙。我們儘量不要在智慧體 AI 與量子上重蹈覆轍。
新加坡不會假裝擁有所有答案——但我們想分享我們怎麼思考這些議題、以及我們正在做的事。
我們對智慧體 AI 治理的方法
對一個人手不足的國家而言——智慧體 AI 提供了巨大潛能。
我們看到它們被用來——增強公共服務交付、預判公民需求並提供個性化支援。
我們的中小企業可以從更自動化的運營、資源最佳化中受益。
我們的國家網路安全也可以更強——以智慧體在「機器速度」上偵測、防禦、回應。GovTech 已經在試用。
但每一項新能力都帶來新風險。智慧體 AI 出錯時誰擔責？我們如何防止惡意使用——自動化的網路攻擊或虛假資訊行動？我們如何管理對就業的系統性影響、或潛在的「人類失去控制」？
首先——我們必須系統性地識別風險。今年 GovTech 推出了「智慧體風險與能力框架」（Agentic Risk and Capability Framework）——它定義了智慧體 AI 系統的元件與能力，用以對映風險——並規定保障措施。原則是：在我們能信任「自主性」之前，必須先理解風險出現在哪裡、如何出現。
第二——讓保障變得可操作、可測量。
通過 IMDA 的「AI Verify 框架」與「AI Assurance Sandbox」——我們給開發者開放工具，測試系統的魯棒性、透明性與安全性。
IMDA 也通過「Project Moonshot」增強了 AI Verify，使其覆蓋生成式 AI 的獨有風險——把基準測試與內容紅隊結合起來——測試幻覺與有害內容生成等問題。
我們也在為智慧體 AI 改造工具與安全框架——基於 CSA 的《保護 AI 系統指南與配套指南》（Guidelines and Companion Guide on Securing AI Systems）。
第三——通過真實部署「做中學」。
通過 GovTech-Google Cloud 沙盒倡議——MDDI 旗下機構有機會測試與評估 Google 最新的智慧體能力、評估風險、開發緩釋措施，並把所學分享給新加坡更廣泛的 AI 實務社群。
通過觀察這些系統如何運作——以及有時怎樣失敗——我們能學到「真正需要的護欄」是什麼。
第四——我們一致地採用「基於風險」的治理。
我們對治理採取「分行業」的方法。
這種分行業方法旨在確保治理措施與風險成比例。
例如——影響生計的金融決策比娛樂推薦受到更多審視；醫療診斷的驗證標準比物流最佳化更高。
在所有受監管的行業裡——我們遵循一個原則：「自主越高，所需的保障越強」。
最重要的是——人始終是最終的責任承擔者。
這種協調式做法旨在建立一個全面的治理生態——讓測試框架、安全要求、落地指引能彼此協作。隨著時間推移——我們希望搭出一座「能隨 AI 能力與風險而擴充套件、但每一層都保留人類問責」的「治理棧」。
我們對量子安全的方法
在量子方面——我們也在採取具體行動。
去年我們公佈了《國家量子戰略》——5 年內承諾投入 3 億新元支援量子研發。這些投資建立在 2000 年代初以來打下的基礎上——給學界資源去推動科學邊界，給業界能力去發展商業應用。
但我們也在管理風險。
儘管量子威脅的認知在上升——但很少有組織真正啟動「量子安全遷移」。
原因可能是——量子發展不確定，且缺少具體指南。
CSA 今天將通過啟動兩份資源公開徵求意見，來填補這一空缺。
第一——「量子準備度指數」（Quantum Readiness Index）——一個自評工具——幫助組織理解自己面對加密量子威脅的當前準備度，並規劃向「量子安全系統」的遷移路徑。
第二——「量子安全手冊」（Quantum-Safe Handbook）——為組織（尤其是關鍵資訊基礎設施持有者與政府機構）提供向「量子安全密碼學」過渡的指引。這本手冊由 CSA、GovTech、IMDA 聯合開發——並與領先科技公司、網路安全諮詢公司、專業協會合作完成。
我們把這些資源視為 MVP——「最小可行產品」——是會通過公開反饋持續改進的「活文件」。歡迎大家貢獻——我們一起學習。
國際合作
現在我談一談國際合作這一重要議題。
對我們今天討論的兩項技術——有一個根本現實：
智慧體 AI 與量子計算都不尊重國界。
量子計算在任何地方的突破，都會影響所有地方的加密。
一個國家系統中的漏洞，能在全球級聯放大。
這意味著——國際合作必須從「原則」走向「實踐」。
一種方式是確保「跨不同系統、跨不同國家可互操作的治理框架」。例如：
新加坡與 NIST 的「互通對照」（crosswalk）希望讓公司「測試一次、全球合規」（test once, comply globally）。
AI Verify 的測試框架與國際標準對齊，包括 ISO/IEC 42001 與 G7「廣島 AI 程序」原則。
這降低了合規負擔——同時維持嚴格的標準。這是一個我們必須時刻記住的實操考量。公司在每一項行動（包括測試）上都會評估成本與收益。
通過與澳大利亞、英國等國簽訂的《數字經濟協定》（DEA）——我們也把治理原則嵌入貿易關係中。我們 2024 年釋出了《ASEAN AI 治理與倫理指南》——以協調東南亞的做法——並在 2025 年擴充套件至覆蓋生成式 AI。
在「智慧體 AI 安全」這件事上——我們也在國際上主動出招。
CSA 正在公開徵求意見——釋出一份關於「保護智慧體 AI」的檔案。
該檔案是其《保護 AI 系統指南與配套指南》的「附錄」——專門覆蓋智慧體 AI 系統的獨有風險。
它也是一封邀請函——邀請政府、研究者、產業夥伴——共同塑造「保護智慧體 AI」的全球參考。
在量子計算上——NIST 的新「抗量子密碼學標準」給我們一套共同的技術基礎。
但僅靠標準還不夠。
我們必須在區域與國際上協作——制定並協調遷移建議。
這是一個我的 ASEAN 同行希望進一步討論的領域——我們將研究如何促成這樣的對話。
除了政府間合作——我們也在與產業深化實操級夥伴關係。
CSA 將與多家主要科技公司——包括 Google、AWS、TRM Labs——簽署合作備忘錄——加強 AI 驅動的網路威脅情報共享，並啟動針對惡意活動的聯合行動。
我們與 Google 的夥伴關係展現了實在的好處——「Google Play Protect」中的「增強反欺詐保護」功能——截至 2025 年 9 月——已在新加坡 622,000 臺裝置上攔截了 278 萬次惡意應用安裝。
結尾
讓我做個收尾。
智慧體 AI 時代已至——量子安全準備的時刻就在當下。它們帶來許多承諾——也帶來許多未知。
「最大化上行、最小化下行」——這是我們的共同利益。帶著緊迫感與目的感一起協作——我們才能學得更快、把握更大的成功機率。
再次感謝各位參加 SICW——祝大家有更多富有成效的討論。
英文原文
MDDI 官網原始記錄 · 抓取日期: 2026-05-02
My Cabinet colleague, Mr Goh Pei Ming
Fellow Ministers, excellencies,
Distinguished guests,
Colleagues and friends
Welcome to Day 2 of the Singapore International Cyber Week. We are glad to see so many developers, security practitioners, and policymakers gathered here today.
We are living through an extraordinary moment in technology. Two developments are reshaping our world right before our eyes.
The first is agentic AI – systems that do not just analyse and recommend, but decide and take action.
They can already help us schedule meetings, write and deploy code, even automate entire business operations.
Implemented properly, agentic AI will likely be a welcomed teammate that amplifies human abilities, freeing us from repetitive work and enabling faster responses to complex problems.
But there are also questions of accountability when systems malfunction, and humans lose control.
The second is quantum computing.
This technology will fundamentally change how we think about trust, especially in cryptography and secure communications.
While it promises revolutionary capabilities in drug discovery and financial modelling, it could also break current encryption, potentially compromising both national security and business operations.
Both technologies offer tremendous promise. But they also pose serious risks.
More significantly, both demand something new from us: a shift from reactive regulation to proactive preparation when their implications cannot be fully predicted.
This shift can be our aspiration, but it will take collective will, wisdom and action to govern these technologies before they govern us.
INTERNATIONAL SCAN
Fortunately, many countries are already seeking answers.
On agentic AI, we wrestle with the same basic question: how to govern AI that can act autonomously?
The EU and South Korea have established comprehensive AI regulations, but agentic AI's autonomous decision-making capabilities create practical challenges in meeting key requirements like transparency and human oversight.
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is developing testing standards for AI agents rather than prescriptive rules.
The UK's AI Security Institute has developed sandboxing toolkits for testing AI agents, though it is not known if “passing” a test guarantees good behaviour as the agents learn and evolve.
In quantum, there is also growing momentum.
The UN has declared 2025 the International Year of Quantum Science and Technology – an extraordinary international consensus on quantum's transformative potential.
The EU launched its Quantum Europe Strategy to turn scientific leadership into industrial strength.
South Korea established a Quantum Strategy Committee backed by significant funding. Japan declared 2025 the first year of quantum industrialisation.
Along with hope, there is fear that quantum capabilities can be misused to break encryption and threaten the foundation of our digital systems.
We want to know how to thrive in a post-quantum future – both in terms of harnessing the opportunities and managing the risks. The question is: how long can we afford to wait for the answers?
OUR GOVERNANCE OBJECTIVES
As policymakers, we should always strive to be clear about our governance objectives when taking actions. Whether for agentic AI or quantum computing, I suggest that there are three objectives at this juncture.
First, our goal must be to build trust with citizens through assurance, and not necessarily control all the instances where AI agents and quantum technologies are deployed.
Good governance begins with understanding risks even when we do not exercise control, and building the tools to manage the risks systematically.
We need practical frameworks for testing, validation, and accountability before systems are deployed at scale, because it may be too late to address the risks by then.
Second, we must ensure that the frameworks and tests are relevant and robust in real-world applications. This calls for the provision of safe spaces for experimentation, with appropriate guardrails.
Third, we want to ensure timely action. In several areas, we know the costs of not having acted early enough – the digital divide, misinformation, disinformation, online harms, and scams, for example. Let us try not to make the same mistakes with agentic AI and quantum.
Singapore will not pretend to have all the answers. But we would like to share how we are thinking about these issues and what we are doing in response.
OUR APPROACH TO AGENTIC AI GOVERNANCE
For a country with insufficient manpower, agentic AI offers tremendous potential.
We can see them being used to enhance public service delivery, to anticipate citizens’ needs and provide personalised support.
Our SMEs can benefit from more automated operations and resource optimisation.
Our national cybersecurity can be stronger with the use of intelligent agents to detect, defend and respond at machine speed. GovTech is already experimenting.
But every new capability brings new risks. Who is accountable when agentic AI malfunctions? How do we prevent malicious use – automated cyberattacks or misinformation campaigns? How do we manage systemic impacts on jobs or potential loss of human control?
First, we must identify risks systematically. This year, GovTech launched the Agentic Risk and Capability Framework. It defines components and capabilities of agentic AI systems, to map risks, and prescribes safeguards. The principle is that we must understand where and how risks arise before we can trust autonomy.
Second, making assurance practical and measurable.
Through the IMDA’s AI Verify Framework and AI Assurance Sandbox, we give developers open tools to test their systems for robustness, transparency, and safety. systems for robustness, transparency, and safety.
IMDA had also enhanced AI Verify to cover generative AI's unique risks through Project Moonshot, which combines benchmarking and content red-teaming to test for issues like hallucination and harmful content generation.
We are adapting our tools and security frameworks for agentic AI – building on the CSA’s Guidelines and Companion Guide on Securing AI Systems.
Third, learning by doing with real deployment.
Through the GovTech-Google Cloud sandbox initiative, MDDI agencies have a chance to test and evaluate Google’s latest agentic capabilities, assess the risks, develop mitigation measures, and share the lessons learned with the broader community of AI practitioners in Singapore.
By observing how these systems behave – and sometimes fail – we learn what guardrails are truly needed.
Fourth, we are applying risk-based governance consistently.
We take a sector-specific approach to governance.
This sector-specific approach is designed to ensure that governance measures are proportionate to the risks.
For example, financial decisions affecting livelihoods receive more scrutiny compared with entertainment recommendations, and medical diagnoses demand higher validation standards than logistics optimisation.
Across our regulated sectors, we follow the principle that the higher the autonomy, the stronger the assurance needed.
Most importantly, humans remain ultimately responsible.
This coordinated approach aims to create a comprehensive governance ecosystem where testing frameworks, security requirements, and practical implementation guidance work together. Over time, we hope to build a governance stack that scales with AI capability and risk, while maintaining human accountability at every level.
OUR APPROACH TO QUANTUM SAFE
In quantum, we are also taking concrete action.
Last year, we announced the National Quantum Strategy with S$300 million committed over five years to quantum research and development. These investments build on foundations dating back to the early 2000s to give academia resources to push scientific boundaries, and support industry with capabilities to develop commercial applications.
But we are also managing the risks.
While there is growing awareness of the quantum threat, few organisations have embarked on quantum safe migration.
This is likely because of uncertainty over quantum developments and the lack of specific guidance.
CSA will plug this gap by launching two resources for public consultation today.
First, the Quantum Readiness Index is a self-assessment tool that helps organisations understand their current preparedness for quantum threats to encryption, and chart their migration journey towards quantum-safe systems.
Second, the Quantum-Safe Handbook provides guidance for organisations, particularly Critical Information Infrastructure owners and government agencies, to ready themselves for the transition to quantum-safe cryptography. This handbook was jointly developed by CSA, GovTech, and IMDA, in collaboration with leading technology companies, cybersecurity consultancies, and professional associations.
We consider these resources to be MVP – minimum viable products – live documents that get improved through public feedback. And we welcome you to contribute so we can all learn together.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Let me now turn to the important topic of international cooperation.
There is a fundamental reality about both technologies that we have discussed today.
Neither agentic AI nor quantum computing respects borders.
A breakthrough in quantum computing anywhere affects encryption everywhere.
A vulnerability in one country's systems can cascade globally.
This means international cooperation must turn from principle to practice.
One way is to ensure interoperable governance frameworks that work across different systems and countries. For example:
Singapore’s crosswalk with NIST hopes to enable companies to "test once, comply globally".
AI Verify's testing framework aligns with international standards including ISO/IEC 42001 and the G7's Hiroshima AI Process principles.
This reduces compliance burden while maintaining rigorous standards. It is a practical consideration that we must keep in mind. Companies always evaluate the cost and benefit of any action, including testing.
Through Digital Economy Agreements with countries like Australia and the UK, we also embed governance principles into trade relationships. We published the ASEAN Guide on AI Governance and Ethics in 2024 to harmonise Southeast Asian approaches, with a further expansion in 2025 to cover generative AI.
On agentic AI security specifically, we are taking proactive steps to address the challenges internationally.
CSA is releasing for public consultation a document on securing agentic AI.
This document is an addendum to its Guidelines and Companion Guide on Securing AI Systems, to cover the unique risks of agentic AI systems.
It is also an invitation – to governments, researchers, and industry partners – to help shape a global reference for securing agentic AI.
On quantum computing, the new NIST quantum-resistant cryptographic standards give us a common technical foundation.
But standards alone are insufficient.
We need to work regionally and internationally to develop and coordinate migration advice.
This is an area that my ASEAN colleagues have asked for further discussions on, and we will see how to facilitate.
Besides inter-governmental cooperation, we are deepening practical partnerships with industry.
CSA will be signing memoranda of cooperation with major technology companies, including Google, AWS, and TRM Labs, to enhance AI-driven intelligence sharing on cyber threats and enable joint operations against malicious activities.
Our partnership with Google demonstrates the tangible benefits – the Enhanced Fraud Protection feature within Google Play Protect has blocked 2.78 million malicious app installations across 622,000 devices in Singapore as of September 2025.
CONCLUSION
Let me conclude.
The age of agentic AI is upon us and the time for quantum-safe preparation is now. They bring much promise but also many unknowns.
We have a collective interest in maximising the upsides while minimising the downsides. By working together with a sense of urgency and purpose, we will learn faster and better our chances of success.
On that note, I thank you once again for being part of SICW and wish you many more fruitful discussions.