Yes, all of them. Every channel through which the ASI can causally influence the outside world would ideally pass through the monitored interface. That would be the starting point of the whole architecture.
That said, the proposal doesn’t necessarily collapse if this is violated. It makes subsequent dangerous actions more likely to occur, but not inevitable, because the finiteness argument applies to the physical world broadly, not just the interface. Even if the ASI communicates through an undetected side channel, whatever entity receives that communication still has to take actions in the physical world. And ultimately catastrophic outcomes (engineered pathogens, nuclear access, infrastructure takeover) are the end products of long causal chains with observable physical steps, nonzero timescales, and points at which a vastly faster-thinking defensive agent can detect and intervene.
Does this include all its communications?
Yes, all of them. Every channel through which the ASI can causally influence the outside world would ideally pass through the monitored interface. That would be the starting point of the whole architecture.
That said, the proposal doesn’t necessarily collapse if this is violated. It makes subsequent dangerous actions more likely to occur, but not inevitable, because the finiteness argument applies to the physical world broadly, not just the interface. Even if the ASI communicates through an undetected side channel, whatever entity receives that communication still has to take actions in the physical world. And ultimately catastrophic outcomes (engineered pathogens, nuclear access, infrastructure takeover) are the end products of long causal chains with observable physical steps, nonzero timescales, and points at which a vastly faster-thinking defensive agent can detect and intervene.