Speaker 1: Welcome to the deep dive. Today we're getting into something that, well,
Speaker 1: it touches almost everything in our hyper connected lives. There's
Speaker 1: that ts Eliot quote, where's the knowledge we have lost?
Speaker 1: In information? It feels especially fitting now, doesn't it? When
Speaker 1: access to info shapes so much?
Speaker 2: It really does. And you think about how fast information
Speaker 2: is growing, Yeah, doubling what was it every seventy three
Speaker 2: days by twenty twenty. That prediction the sheer amount of
Speaker 2: data we create, well, it just creates more targets, more
Speaker 2: security risks.
Speaker 1: Exactly, which brings us straight to today's deep dive. Hacking. Now,
Speaker 1: when you hear hacking, most people probably jump straight to
Speaker 1: the illegal stuff, right, the negative side.
Speaker 2: That's sort of movie version.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's interesting. The word originally meant something more
Speaker 1: like ingenuity, making tech do more than you thought.
Speaker 2: It could, pushing the boundaries, right.
Speaker 1: But today yeah, mostly we mean gaining unauthorized access digital
Speaker 1: networks devices, usually over the Internet.
Speaker 2: So our mission here is to kind of peel back
Speaker 2: the layers on this whole world. We want to look
Speaker 2: at it. How hacking evolved, I mean, its origins are
Speaker 2: pretty surprising, and who the hackers actually are, what tools
Speaker 2: they're using, and the threats, the really serious threats to
Speaker 2: individuals like you listening to businesses, even national security.
Speaker 1: And we'll also get into that tricky debate. Is hacking
Speaker 1: ever justified. There's a whole gray area there, definitely.
Speaker 2: And finally, what's being done to fight back. The goal
Speaker 2: is to give you a solid understanding, you know, without
Speaker 2: drowning you in technical jargon.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's dive in because the history, like you said,
Speaker 1: it's not what most people probably think, not at all.
Speaker 2: So fundamentally, hacking is about getting access you shouldn't have
Speaker 2: or doing more than you're allowed to within a system,
Speaker 2: often by finding weaknesses vulnerabilities nobody else knows about it.
Speaker 1: But it's not always just about code and computers. Is
Speaker 1: that there's a big human element.
Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely huge. That's social engineering. It's basically using social
Speaker 2: skills psychology to trick people, get them to give up
Speaker 2: without realizing it.
Speaker 1: Like looking over someone's shoulder for a password that's simple.
Speaker 2: Yeah, shoulder surfing, that's one way, Or crafting clever emails,
Speaker 2: fake websites, you click something and boom, your computers infected.
Speaker 2: They play on trust or fear or curiosity.
Speaker 1: And this idea, this exploiting systems, It goes way way
Speaker 1: back right.
Speaker 2: The very first sort of proto hack. Yeah, nineteen thirties
Speaker 2: Polish mathematicians Marian Radjuski and his team they cracked the
Speaker 2: Nazi Enigma.
Speaker 1: Machine, the messaging machine.
Speaker 2: Exactly, which operated with programming codes, kind of like early computers.
Speaker 2: And that breakthrough it let the British decode German messages
Speaker 2: in World War Two. Huge historical impact.
Speaker 1: Wow. So the core concept is almost a century old.
Speaker 1: But the word.
Speaker 2: Hacker that came later late nineteen fifties mit the tech
Speaker 2: model Railroad Club believe it or.
Speaker 1: Not, where Rose.
Speaker 2: They had this mainframe computer and these students found ways
Speaker 2: to get unauthorized access, usually with paper punch cards, just
Speaker 2: to get more time on it to develop software. It
Speaker 2: wasn't malicious, It was about you know, figuring things out,
Speaker 2: pushing limits for fund So it started pretty innocently.
Speaker 1: When did it turn more sinister?
Speaker 2: The big shift was really the Internet going mainstream the nineties.
Speaker 2: That's when hacking, just mushroomed, became this massive global issue.
Speaker 1: How big are we talking?
Speaker 2: Well, think about this. By two eleven, the FBI's Internet
Speaker 2: Crime Complaints Center, they were getting twenty five thousand complaints
Speaker 2: a month.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the damages billions every year, theft fixing systems
Speaker 2: lost time. Yeah, it became a serious economic drain.
Speaker 1: So who are these people doing the hacking? It's not
Speaker 1: just one.
Speaker 2: Type, right, definitely not. You've still got the hobbyists like
Speaker 2: Brian Harvey Berkeley described, and the people who just love computers,
Speaker 2: live and breathe them, want to make them do anything
Speaker 2: for them. It's still about the challenge, the knowledge.
Speaker 1: Okay, the original spirit kind of sort of.
Speaker 2: But then you have the ones making headlines. Yeah, the
Speaker 2: black hat hackers. It's bad guys pretty much like villains
Speaker 2: and old Westerns, hence the name. They're hacking for illegal money,
Speaker 2: stealing it, or just to cause chaos, break things.
Speaker 1: And because of the black hats, you need the white hats.
Speaker 2: These are the good guys. The security professionals. Companies hire
Speaker 2: them to hack their systems, find the weak spots and
Speaker 2: fix them before the black hats do. Ethical hacking makes sense.
Speaker 1: Is there anything in between?
Speaker 2: Yeah, the gray hats they're not out to steal, but
Speaker 2: they're not strictly defensive either. I think researchers, maybe hobbyists
Speaker 2: trying to improve things, sometimes bending the rules a bit.
Speaker 1: And then there's another category entirely.
Speaker 2: Activists, right, These are political or social activists. They target governments,
Speaker 2: good corporations, not usually for money, but as a form
Speaker 2: of protest, to make a statement, push for change. Groups
Speaker 2: like anonymous lulled sec. Those are classic examples.
Speaker 1: Okay, so a whole range of players. What about their tools?
Speaker 1: How do they actually break in?
Speaker 2: It's a mix sophisticated software, yes, but also exploiting simple
Speaker 2: human mistakes, like we talked about with social engineering malware.
Speaker 2: Malicious software is a huge part of it.
Speaker 1: Like viruses.
Speaker 2: Viruses are one type. Yeah. A really common tool, especially
Speaker 2: for getting initial access, is.
Speaker 1: The trojan, like the trojan horse.
Speaker 2: Exactly the same idea. It looks like something harmless, maybe
Speaker 2: a useful program or file. You download it, run it,
Speaker 2: and it secretly opens the back door for the hacker,
Speaker 2: lets them hide their tracks, download more nasty.
Speaker 1: Stuff, and they can just buy these things.
Speaker 2: Some develop their own, but yeah, you can actually buy
Speaker 2: trojans and other malware toolkits on underground forums. Its whole
Speaker 2: economy scary.
Speaker 1: What about worms?
Speaker 2: I hear about those worms are really dangerous because they
Speaker 2: spread by themselves. A worm infects one computer, then it
Speaker 2: automatically scans the network and copies itself to other vulnerable machines.
Speaker 1: So it replicates automatically.
Speaker 2: Right, and it can take control of those infected computers,
Speaker 2: turning them into zombies. Zombies basically computers controlled remotely by
Speaker 2: the hacker without the owner knowing. When you get thousands
Speaker 2: or even millions of these zombies linked together, that's a botnet.
Speaker 1: And what can they do with a botnet.
Speaker 2: All sorts of things. Common use is a distributed denial
Speaker 2: of service attack a DDAs attack. The hacker tells all
Speaker 2: the zombies and the botnet to flood a target website
Speaker 2: or network with traffic all at once, overwhelming it. Exactly,
Speaker 2: it just can't handle the load and it shuts down.
Speaker 2: Russia used this against Estonia back in two thousand and seven,
Speaker 2: a big political cyber attack.
Speaker 1: I remember hearing about that.
Speaker 2: And remember the Configer worm. By twenty eleven, it had
Speaker 2: infected something like seven million computers worldwide, huge potential for damage.
Speaker 1: What did it do?
Speaker 2: Ironically, mostly sent spam, but it could have done much worse.
Speaker 2: Shows how versatile these botnets are.
Speaker 1: Okay, so trojans worms, what.
Speaker 2: Else you mentioned viruses. They can erase files, mess up
Speaker 2: your system, often spread through email attachments you shouldn't open.
Speaker 2: Then there's spyware. Spying software pretty much hides on your
Speaker 2: computer and watches what you do online, tracks websites you visit,
Speaker 2: logs keystrokes, maybe sometimes changes your settings, slows things down.
Speaker 1: And besides malware, hackers use.
Speaker 2: Tools like password crackers, programs that try millions of combinations
Speaker 2: to guest passwords, and sniffers, which intercept data traveling over
Speaker 2: a network. They can grab business secrets, credit card numbers,
Speaker 2: anything not properly encrypted.
Speaker 1: It sounds incredibly technical.
Speaker 2: A lot of it is, but again, never underestimate the
Speaker 2: human angle social engineering. Remember the Sarah Palin email hack
Speaker 2: in two thousand and eight. Vaguely a college student got
Speaker 2: in simply by resetting her password using public info, her birthday,
Speaker 2: zip code, where she met her husband, stuff you could
Speaker 2: find on Google.
Speaker 1: Seriously, that's all it took.
Speaker 2: Yep shows how basic information could be of vulnerability, and
Speaker 2: it gets worse. In twenty eleven, there was a report
Speaker 2: hackers put malware into online games. Games for preschoolers. No way,
Speaker 2: because toddlers can't read warning messages. They click yes to anything,
Speaker 2: so their parents' computers got infected, became part of botnets,
Speaker 2: and potentially gain hackers access to the parent's financial info.
Speaker 1: That's incredibly low.
Speaker 2: It really is. Shows how far some will go.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about the fallout the costs. This must
Speaker 1: have a huge impact financially, impersonally, oh immense.
Speaker 2: The global cost of cybercrime back in twenty ten, estimates
Speaker 2: were around three hundred and eighty eight billion dollars billion
Speaker 2: with a b YEP which get this was apparently more
Speaker 2: than the entire global trade in legal drugs at the
Speaker 2: time by about thirty five percent.
Speaker 1: That's staggering, it is.
Speaker 2: And you see big cases all the time. The US
Speaker 2: Secret Service just in twenty ten made arrests linked to
Speaker 2: over half a billion dollars in fraud.
Speaker 1: And businesses are right in the firing line absolutely.
Speaker 2: City Group twenty eleven hackers got in stole about two
Speaker 2: point seven million dollars from customer accounts through freak purchases,
Speaker 2: cash advances. Customers lost trust, left the bank.
Speaker 1: And Sony had huge problems around then too, right.
Speaker 2: Massive problems also twenty eleven their PlayStation network Sony Pictures
Speaker 2: hit hard cost them over one hundred and seventy seven
Speaker 2: million dollars. That's downtime fixing things, stock price drop, but
Speaker 2: also huge reputation damage. Personal data, credit card info for May,
Speaker 2: seventy million users got exposed.
Speaker 1: Seventy million ouch.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that wasn't even the first really big one.
Speaker 2: KEJX companies TJ Max Marshals back in two thousand and
Speaker 2: six they lost forty million credit in debit card numbers
Speaker 2: cost them two hundred million dollars.
Speaker 1: So these massive breaches aren't new.
Speaker 2: Not at all. Even Google got targeted in twenty ten
Speaker 2: an attempt likely by the Chinese government, they said, to
Speaker 2: get into their source code systems, aiming for the Gmail
Speaker 2: accounts of human rights activists.
Speaker 1: Did they succeed?
Speaker 2: Google said no, they caught it, but it shows the risk.
Speaker 2: As Dave Dewol from McAfee said, just one breach can
Speaker 2: cause irreparable financial damage to reputation, stock price, customer confidence.
Speaker 1: It sounds relentless. How common is this for businesses?
Speaker 2: Depressingly common. A survey ending early twenty eleven found ninety
Speaker 2: percent of US businesses got hacked at least once in
Speaker 2: the previous year, and fifty nine percent got hacked twice.
Speaker 1: Or more ninety percent.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Stuart mccluar, also from McAfee, famously said something like,
Speaker 2: if you plug into the Internet without a good firewall,
Speaker 2: you could get hacked before the arrives, like under thirty minutes.
Speaker 1: So it's basically constant.
Speaker 2: Pretty much a constant threat.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and what about individuals beyond the big data breaches?
Speaker 2: Individuals are definitely targets too. Remember Christopher Cheney arrested in
Speaker 2: twenty eleven for hacking about fifty celebrities email cell phones.
Speaker 2: Scarlett Johansson's private photos got leaked because of him.
Speaker 1: How did he do it?
Speaker 2: Just piecing together clues from their social media public appearances,
Speaker 2: again using available information. And it's not just celebrities. A
Speaker 2: twenty ten poll found thirty percent of teens and young
Speaker 2: adults said their social media had been hacked. Anyone online
Speaker 2: is potentially vulnerable.
Speaker 1: Okay, so it's hitting individuals, businesses, but it goes even higher, right,
Speaker 1: national security.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, this is where it gets into cyber warfare, espionage.
Speaker 2: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned about the next Pearl
Speaker 2: Harbor being a cyber attack crippling power grids, financial systems,
Speaker 2: government operations.
Speaker 1: That's a terrifying thought.
Speaker 2: It is, and FBI Director Robert Mueller called three it's
Speaker 2: the number one threat to the US in the future.
Speaker 2: US military's networks, they get probed something like six million times.
Speaker 1: A day, six million daily. Who's doing it?
Speaker 2: Often it's state sponsored actors. China has been frequently accused
Speaker 2: of systematic cyber spying against the US, targeting defense contractors,
Speaker 2: stealing huge amounts of data. There were even reports of
Speaker 2: interference with US satellites back in two thousand and seven
Speaker 2: two thousand and eight, possibly linked to the Chinese military
Speaker 2: in Operation Aurora in two thousand and nine that hit Google, Adobe, others,
Speaker 2: trace back to emails with bad links, exploiting flaws, and
Speaker 2: Internet Explorer again widely suspected state involvement is just China.
Speaker 2: Oh No. North Korea in two thousand and nine took
Speaker 2: down websites for the US Treasury Secret Service FTC for
Speaker 2: days using a botnet. Russia hit Georgia with cyber attacks
Speaker 2: in two thousand and nine, right before a military conflict,
Speaker 2: disrupting their defenses.
Speaker 1: So cyber attacks are becoming part of actual warfare exactly.
Speaker 2: They're integrated into military and political strategy now it's changing
Speaker 2: the nature of conflict.
Speaker 1: Countries attacked each other directly like that.
Speaker 2: We've seen things like a hacking skirmish between Israel and
Speaker 2: Saudi Arabia and twenty twelve hitting each other's stock exchanges,
Speaker 2: and reports claimed Israel's Masad hacked the Syrian officials computer
Speaker 2: back in two thousand and six to get nuclear intel.
Speaker 2: It shows the threat to critical infrastructure, power finance is
Speaker 2: very real. Crippling those could cripple a country.
Speaker 1: And it's not just governments we need to worry about, right.
Speaker 2: Director Mueler also warned about terrorist groups like Al Qaeda
Speaker 2: actively trying to get hacking skills, using the Internet for
Speaker 2: recruitment too. So the threat landscape is broad. Nations, criminals, terrorists, activists.
Speaker 1: Okay, So what's being done? How do we fight back
Speaker 1: against all this?
Speaker 2: Well, governments are definitely trying. The Obama administration brought in
Speaker 2: cybersecurity measures for businesses, things like forcing companies to report
Speaker 2: breaches to the SEC, having the NSA share intel with banks,
Speaker 2: and Congress proposed things like the Cybersecurity Act of twenty twelve,
Speaker 2: aiming to protect critical infrastructure, set security standards, and SISPA.
Speaker 2: The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which was controversial.
Speaker 2: Why controversial because it would let Internet companies and others
Speaker 2: monitor user info and share with the government. Privacy advocates
Speaker 2: like the Electronic Privacy Information Center were really worried. They
Speaker 2: argue that data collected for cybersecurity could end up being
Speaker 2: used for other investigations, infringing on privacy rights.
Speaker 1: So there's a tension there, security versus privacy, a.
Speaker 2: Huge tension, and some former top officials like Mike McConnell
Speaker 2: Richard Clark were saying the US was actually losing the
Speaker 2: cyber war, that defenses were woefully lacking. So it's a
Speaker 2: really complex ongoing debate, which.
Speaker 1: Leads us into another really complex area. This idea of
Speaker 1: justification is hacking. Ever, Okay, that's where activism comes in,
Speaker 1: right exactly.
Speaker 2: Hackavists often see themselves as performing a public service. They
Speaker 2: might say they're exposing security flaws that companies or governments ignore,
Speaker 2: or uncovering secret documents they think the public has a
Speaker 2: right to see. It's protest, basically digital protest.
Speaker 1: Like George Harts, the guy who hacked the PlayStation three.
Speaker 2: Right back in two thousand and nine, he wanted to
Speaker 2: bypass its limitations let people run other software on it.
Speaker 2: He shared how he did it online, called it a
Speaker 2: victory for consumers, said things like we build this world.
Speaker 2: We are not mindless consumers.
Speaker 1: Did he get in trouble?
Speaker 2: Sony sued him. Yeah, but Apple when he unlocked the
Speaker 2: iPhone back in two thousand and seven to work on
Speaker 2: other carriers, they actually didn't sue, though they patched the
Speaker 2: vulnerability later.
Speaker 1: Interesting difference. What about groups like Anonymous?
Speaker 2: They took it further. Loulsek and Anonymous had Operation Anti
Speaker 2: Security in twenty eleven. They hacked places like the CIA
Speaker 2: the US Senate, claiming they were exposing classified info to
Speaker 2: help the government fix their issues.
Speaker 1: Helping by hacking.
Speaker 2: That's bold, very Lulsek even put out a letter warning
Speaker 2: regular Internet users about weak security on Facebook, Gmail, Skype.
Speaker 2: Another group, goat see Security, hacked at and T's iPad
Speaker 2: network in twenty ten, affecting over one hundred thousand users
Speaker 2: just to show vulnerabilities. The framed it as a service to.
Speaker 1: Customers, and it gets political too.
Speaker 2: Right deeply. Anonymous went after the Syrian government in twenty
Speaker 2: eleven twenty twelve, hacked websites, emails, even leaked emails showing
Speaker 2: advice given to president aside for a big TV interview
Speaker 2: EW And in twenty twelve they hit Alabama state website
Speaker 2: to protest immigration laws. Releasing residents personal records direct political action.
Speaker 1: But there have to be strong arguments against this.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, Releasing government secrets could endanger soldiers or agents, shutting
Speaker 2: down websites, disrupts essential services. Add More, Mullen, when he
Speaker 2: was chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said WikiLeaks, which often
Speaker 2: published leaks from hackers, might end up with blood on
Speaker 2: their hands. And just the legality of it right, As
Speaker 2: one British editor, Paul Connolly put it bluntly, it is
Speaker 2: simply illegal to hack into phones.
Speaker 1: That whole news of the world scandal in the UK
Speaker 1: really brought that home, didn't it.
Speaker 2: Definitely A huge newspaper shut down in twenty eleven over
Speaker 2: allegations its reporters hacked hundreds of cell phones, crime victim, celebrities,
Speaker 2: politicians just to get scoops. One former editor even tried
Speaker 2: to justify it as part of the journalistic mission.
Speaker 1: So how does the public see these hectivists? It seems divided,
Speaker 1: very divided.
Speaker 2: Hacktivists were apparently responsible for almost sixty percent of all
Speaker 2: stolen data in twenty eleven. Businesses often see them as
Speaker 2: a bigger, more unpredictable threat than regular cyber criminals. But
Speaker 2: then you see anonymous topping Time magazines Most Influential People
Speaker 2: poll in twenty twelve, got way more votes than President Obama.
Speaker 2: It shows a real split in public opinion about their
Speaker 2: methods and motives.
Speaker 1: Okay, so it's messy complicated. Given all this, this constant
Speaker 1: back and forth, can hackers actually be stopped? Is this
Speaker 1: fight winnable?
Speaker 2: That's the million dollar question, isn't it. Secre Computing Corporation
Speaker 2: called it a cat and mouse game that's unlikely to
Speaker 2: end soon. Hackers are specialists, always innovating, finding new ways
Speaker 2: around security improvements.
Speaker 1: Especially with these advanced persistent threats exactly apts.
Speaker 2: These are long term, sophisticated attacks, often date sponsored or
Speaker 2: by very organized groups. They're patient, they adapt, They're incredibly
Speaker 2: hard to defend against completely.
Speaker 1: The governments are trying to clamp down. You mentioned laws, right.
Speaker 2: The US has the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act from
Speaker 2: way back in eighty six. China brought in laws in
Speaker 2: twenty eleven making even possessing hacking tools illegal with long
Speaker 2: prison sentences, and the US keeps proposing new laws funding research.
Speaker 1: And law enforcement.
Speaker 2: The FBI has dedicated cybercrime units. They've made some big busts,
Speaker 2: like the Rov group that stole millions from computers worldwide.
Speaker 2: They've also arrested members of anonymous in Luldzek for things
Speaker 2: like the stratfor hack using stolen credit cards.
Speaker 1: And they sometimes turn hackers.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a controversial tactic using hackers as informants. Hector
Speaker 2: Monseigor Sabu a leader in Luldzek. He became an FBI informant,
Speaker 2: helped them arrest others in exchange for leniency. It works sometimes,
Speaker 2: but raises ethical questions.
Speaker 1: Is everyone on board with these government tactics?
Speaker 2: Not entirely. Germany's highest court push back against police using
Speaker 2: spyware citing privacy. US email providers have fought against giving
Speaker 2: access to accounts without warrants. There's pushback on privacy grounds.
Speaker 1: What about the tech industry itself? What are they doing?
Speaker 2: They're definitely involved. Microsoft created its Digital Crimes Unit in
Speaker 2: twenty ten, lawyers investigators fighting cybercrime globally. They helped take
Speaker 2: down the Rustock botnet. Remember the one sending thirty billion
Speaker 2: spam emails a day, and the whole cybersecurity field is professionalizing.
Speaker 2: Huge demand for Certified Information Systems Security professionals CISSPs. They
Speaker 2: needed like two million more by twenty fourteen. The demand
Speaker 2: is massive, plus developing defensive tools like honeypots. Honeypots yeah,
Speaker 2: basically decoy systems set up to lure attackers, trap their malware,
Speaker 2: and study their techniques.
Speaker 1: Clever is their cooperation between companies.
Speaker 2: Increasingly, Yes, financial giants like Morgan Stanley, Goldensachs partnering with
Speaker 2: universities like NYU to share threat data spot attacks. Earlier,
Speaker 2: the FCC push for an anti bought code of Conduct
Speaker 2: for Internet providers.
Speaker 1: Collaboration is key, but there are still big gaps in defense.
Speaker 2: Huge gaps. Estimate suggests only maybe twenty five percent of
Speaker 2: electronic data is properly secured, and forty percent of business
Speaker 2: leaders admit they just don't have the capability to detect
Speaker 2: or prevent cybercrime effectively.
Speaker 1: Even chief technology officers.
Speaker 2: Even among CTOs, only about fifty nine percent felt really
Speaker 2: confident they could fend off attacks. A big barrier's budget,
Speaker 2: especially for smaller businesses, and finding skilled security people is
Speaker 2: tough and expensive.
Speaker 1: And we still make mistakes ourselves.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, user error is still a big factor. Microsoft
Speaker 2: figured about five percent of people don't handle their antivirus right,
Speaker 2: might even download malware despite warnings, and free antivirus often
Speaker 2: isn't as good as paid versions, leaving gaps.
Speaker 1: So it feels like we're always playing.
Speaker 2: Catch up pretty much. A Dloitte study found hackers developed
Speaker 2: new attacks much faster than defenders can create defenses. Perry
Speaker 2: Olsen at Intel basically said, compromises inevitable, Data loss is inevitable.
Speaker 2: What of do us? Is a shift in thinking, maybe
Speaker 2: perfect prevention isn't possible.
Speaker 1: So focus on resilience bouncing back.
Speaker 2: That seems to be the direction which leads to the
Speaker 2: absolute necessity of international cooperation. Hacking is global. Cyber criminals
Speaker 2: operate across borders. Law enforcement needs to work together share intelligence.
Speaker 2: We've seen successes when they do, even between countries that
Speaker 2: don't always get along.
Speaker 1: Okay, so we've covered a lot of ground here from
Speaker 1: those early MIT hobbyists.
Speaker 2: Just tinkering right, pushing boundaries.
Speaker 1: It is an incredibly complex global threat affecting everyone, individuals, companies, nations,
Speaker 1: driven by money, politics, protest all sorts of motives and.
Speaker 2: This constant arms race, this evolution of attacks and defenses,
Speaker 2: it really is a cat and mouse game.
Speaker 1: And despite all the efforts, all the laws, the tech,
Speaker 1: it's clearly not over. Far from it.
Speaker 2: No. Peter Sommer and Ian Brown put it well, Yeah,
Speaker 2: defense has to be about resilience. Prevention is crucial, yes,
Speaker 2: but you also need solid plans to recover quickly when
Speaker 2: not if an attack gets through. It accepts that compromise
Speaker 2: will happen.
Speaker 1: That Intel quote really sticks. Compromise is inevitable. So that
Speaker 1: leaves us and you listening with a pretty big question
Speaker 1: to think about. Well, if some level of compromise in
Speaker 1: our digital lives is inevitable, how do we adapt. How
Speaker 1: do our ideas about trust about security need to change
Speaker 1: in this constantly shifting digital world. What's our personal responsibility
Speaker 1: in all this?
Speaker 2: That's a deep one to ponder, definitely something to think about.
Speaker 1: It is. Thanks for joining us on this deep dive.
Speaker 2: Glad to be here. Until next time. Stay curious and
Speaker 2: maybe double check those passwords.
Speaker 1: Good advice, Stay informed everyone,