Speaker 1: Welcome to the Deep Dive, the show where we take
Speaker 1: a stack of sources and distill them into the most
Speaker 1: important nuggets of knowledge just for you. Today, we're plunging
Speaker 1: into a topic that, well, it touches everyone every single day, cybersecurity.
Speaker 1: Think back to the early vision of the Internet. It
Speaker 1: was meant to be boundless, free, universally accessible, a revolutionary tool.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a tool for communication, for data exchange, and honestly,
Speaker 2: for millions it did deliver on that. It allowed better lives,
Speaker 2: greater connection.
Speaker 1: But fast forward today and we're seeing a vastly different landscape.
Speaker 1: It's become a domain kind of rife with disruption, chaos, compromise.
Speaker 2: Absolutely and what's emerged from our sources, and these are
Speaker 2: ripped straight from today's headlines, is this comprehensive picture of
Speaker 2: how that original promise has been well overshadowed. You've got nations,
Speaker 2: private groups, individual hackers all using the Internet now for
Speaker 2: deeply misleading and frankly often malicious purposes.
Speaker 1: Right, creating these complex political, economic, social challenges all in
Speaker 1: this cyberdie and our mission today is really to navigate
Speaker 1: these significant, sometimes troubling elements. We want to give you
Speaker 1: a shortcut to being well informed, hopefully packed with some
Speaker 1: surprising facts, maybe some practical insights on the topic that,
Speaker 1: let's face it, affects everyone. So yeah, let's dive in
Speaker 1: and unpack this. We started by acknowledging that early promise
Speaker 1: how the Internet genuinely improved countless lives, But then came
Speaker 1: that unexpected turn where it's dark side, you could say,
Speaker 1: began to emerge right alongside the good.
Speaker 2: That's right, I mean, the Internet is still a force
Speaker 2: for good, no question, But it's also clear that nations,
Speaker 2: private groups, individual hackers, they're now profiting from exploiting its vulnerabilities.
Speaker 1: Are there any bright spots though, any signs of pushback?
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, there are glimmers of hope. Look at Mark
Speaker 2: Zuckerberg being held accountable for Facebook's failings, you know, in
Speaker 2: that nationally televised forum. That might signal a shift, a
Speaker 2: shift in public tolerance, maybe possibly. And then there's the
Speaker 2: European Union's GDP, the General Data Protection Regulation. That's another
Speaker 2: significant step.
Speaker 1: Right, holding companies accountable for data problems exactly.
Speaker 2: It shows a willingness to enforce accountability.
Speaker 1: That focus on accountability is crucial. Now let's take a
Speaker 1: kind of fascinating historical detour because, believe it or not,
Speaker 1: the roots of modern cyber terrorism they stretch back centuries.
Speaker 2: It's amazing, isn't it. Our sources highlight three ancient precursors.
Speaker 2: It really shows that while the tools change, some of
Speaker 2: the core motivations while they endure.
Speaker 1: So who are we talking about?
Speaker 2: Well, first consider the Zealots operating against the Roman Empire.
Speaker 2: They use daggers, knives, often in crowded places. You make
Speaker 2: a statement, a violent political statement, yeah, demanding Rome give
Speaker 2: up Palestine. Their impact was brief but intense, and interestingly,
Speaker 2: the word Hammas today it actually means zeal Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: Then you have the assassins Shia Muslims Middle East eleven
Speaker 2: to thirteenth centuries, another striking parallel. That's so their stated
Speaker 2: goal was to pure urifi Islam, a claim we hear
Speaker 2: echoed even today. Like the Zelots, they use knives, but
Speaker 2: in an uncanny foreshadowing of groups like Isis, they sought
Speaker 2: territorial control and they fostered this culture of martyrdom, chilling.
Speaker 1: And the third group.
Speaker 2: In India, you had the Thugi, where we get our
Speaker 2: word thugs. These were Hindus operating for nearly six hundred years,
Speaker 2: defying local authorities.
Speaker 1: Six hundred years.
Speaker 2: Yeah, their goals were mainly religious, not political, and horrifyingly,
Speaker 2: they managed to kill at least half a million people
Speaker 2: in the name of religion before the British finally defeated.
Speaker 1: Them half a million. That's daggering, it is.
Speaker 2: And what this historical journey chillingly reveals isn't just a
Speaker 2: change in weapons, you know, daggers to digital bombs. It's
Speaker 2: a consistent, enduring human drive for impact, but now it's
Speaker 2: amplified exponentially by the Internet's borderless reach. The mindset of terror,
Speaker 2: it seems, remains unchanged, but the means they've become globally pervasive.
Speaker 1: Really powerful distinction. So with that context, how exactly do
Speaker 1: our sources define what we're facing now in the digital age?
Speaker 1: What is cyber terrorism?
Speaker 2: Well, the definition the use is pretty specific. Premeditated politically
Speaker 2: motivated to tacks against information, computer systems, computer programs, and
Speaker 2: databases that result in violence against governments, businesses, and individuals.
Speaker 1: Premeditated politically motivated.
Speaker 2: Okay, and the Internet has become absolutely critical for this.
Speaker 2: Visis For example, they successfully recruited and estimated twenty thousand
Speaker 2: jihattists from around the.
Speaker 1: Globe, twenty thousand globally. That kind of reach is just
Speaker 1: unimaginable for those ancient groups.
Speaker 2: Exactly ancient terrorists would have marveled at it. And beyond recruitment,
Speaker 2: it's a powerful propaganda machine. Like how well Al Qaeda's
Speaker 2: Inspire magazine it's an online English language thing. They once
Speaker 2: provided these chillingly detailed instructions on how to make a
Speaker 2: car bond Oh my god, yeah, and ISIS videos have
Speaker 2: even you know, exhorted followers to exploit lax US gun
Speaker 2: law to get weapons for attacks against citizens.
Speaker 1: Really makes you stop and think, doesn't it The same
Speaker 1: tech that lets us talk instantly across continents or helps
Speaker 1: with medical research simultaneously empowers these malicious actors. It's a
Speaker 1: stark reminder the tool enhancing your daily life is vulnerable
Speaker 1: to the same dangerous forces we used to just read
Speaker 1: about in history books. Precisely so, if individuals and terror
Speaker 1: groups can exploit these vulnerabilities, what about entire nations. Let's
Speaker 1: pivot now to the global stage. Countries like Russia, they
Speaker 1: seem to be redefining conflict through what they call nonlinear war.
Speaker 2: That's a key concept. We saw it with the annexation
Speaker 2: of Crimea in twenty fourteen, swift, stealthy aggression and immediately
Speaker 2: followed by cyber attacks immediately like the Soak Fussy hack
Speaker 2: on Ukraine's Central Election Commission that same year.
Speaker 1: That it didn't stop there, No.
Speaker 2: It escalated significantly. In December twenty fifteen, there was that
Speaker 2: power grid attack in the Ivano Frankkifsk region of Ukraine,
Speaker 2: left two hundred and thirty thousand residents without.
Speaker 1: That might have been the first time a hack actually
Speaker 1: took down a.
Speaker 2: Power It may well have been, and the coordination involved,
Speaker 2: the operational, the logistics planning. It strongly indicated a state
Speaker 2: sponsored operation.
Speaker 1: And then not Petcha in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2: Right that ransomware attack, it was widespread, targeting not just
Speaker 2: energy but government agencies, transport banks across Ukraine and frankly beyond.
Speaker 1: What really stood out to me in the sources was
Speaker 1: how closely Russia's cyber tactics align with this thing called
Speaker 1: the Jurassumov doctrine. Can you unpack that a bit.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's really important for understanding their strategy. It was
Speaker 2: laid out in twenty thirteen by Valerie jurassim Off, the
Speaker 2: chief of the Russian General Staff. He basically said that
Speaker 2: the lines between war and peace had become blurred.
Speaker 1: Blurred lines exactly.
Speaker 2: That non military means of achieving political and strategic goals
Speaker 2: have grown, and in many cases they have exceeded the
Speaker 2: force of weapons in their effectiveness.
Speaker 1: So information warfare, cyber attacks, they're just as important as
Speaker 1: tanks and missiles, maybe more so.
Speaker 2: In their of you. Yes, they even created a new
Speaker 2: one thousand person cyber warfare unit, the Keebra Voyiska, to
Speaker 2: boost their capabilities.
Speaker 1: They take this very seriously, and that doctrine that thinking
Speaker 1: it directly informed their election interference in the West didn't. Oh.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, their role in the twenty sixteen US presidential election
Speaker 2: came under intense scrutiny. You had wikiliks releasing over forty
Speaker 2: four thousand DNC.
Speaker 1: Emails revealing bias. Yeah. Even Donna Brazil, who took over
Speaker 1: the DNC called it unethical, right.
Speaker 2: And the Department of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence,
Speaker 2: they were confident Russia was behind that hack.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't just the US. France had its own
Speaker 1: problems in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2: Big problems. The TV five Monday news channel got hacked
Speaker 2: by APT twenty eight. That's a group widely believed to
Speaker 2: be linked to Russian military intelligence. Knock them off the
Speaker 2: air for hours, cost millions.
Speaker 1: And the metcron smear campaign.
Speaker 2: Yeah, rumors calling him a CIA operative or homosexual, all baseless,
Speaker 2: designed to undermine him.
Speaker 1: But Germany seemed less effective.
Speaker 2: Interesting, Yes, they weren't heavily targeted, probably because they were prepared.
Speaker 2: They used paper ballots, harder to hack, and there's high
Speaker 2: public trust in their media who formed fact checking teams.
Speaker 2: Preparedness mattered.
Speaker 1: What about Russia's use of disinformation? The sources mentioned contradictory
Speaker 1: stories like around the Skipol poisoning.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a fascinating and frankly disturbing aspect of their strategy.
Speaker 2: Those contradictory descriptions and assertions. They're not a bug, they're
Speaker 2: a feature.
Speaker 1: A feature.
Speaker 2: How so, it's intended to unsettle governments and citizens to
Speaker 2: so confusion make it hard to discern any single truth
Speaker 2: amidst all the noise. It erodes trust.
Speaker 1: But the US response it had its own issues, definitely.
Speaker 2: The FBI, for instance, had what one source called an
Speaker 2: abject failure in alerting nearly five hundred American officials known
Speaker 2: to be targeted by Fancy Bear, another Russian hacking group.
Speaker 1: How many did they alert?
Speaker 2: Only two out of almost five hundred known targets. That's
Speaker 2: not good, not good at all. And then there was
Speaker 2: the whole Kasperski software issue. The Department of on Land
Speaker 2: Security had to order it removed from all government computers.
Speaker 1: How was that?
Speaker 2: Because an NSA employee improperly stored classified documents on a
Speaker 2: home computer that happened to be running Kasperski, it highlighted
Speaker 2: a serious insider threat vulnerability.
Speaker 1: Okay, so Russia's tactics are clear. Let's turn to China.
Speaker 1: What's their focus in the cyberrom.
Speaker 2: China's game is often more about espionage, particularly economic and political.
Speaker 2: One of the most audacious examples was the attack on
Speaker 2: the US Office of Personnel Management OPM.
Speaker 1: Right, that was twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen.
Speaker 2: Yeah, over twenty one million personnel file stolen past and
Speaker 2: present government employees, contractors, their personal information security clearance details.
Speaker 1: A gold mine for intelligence.
Speaker 2: And absolute treasure trove. And the worst part, the Office
Speaker 2: of the Inspector General had warned opm its network was
Speaker 2: highly vulnerable.
Speaker 1: A year before, but they didn't act.
Speaker 2: Senior executives failed to act. It exposed frankly bureaucratic malfila
Speaker 2: and poor leadership. The director eventually resigned, and.
Speaker 1: They target corporations too, oh heavily.
Speaker 2: Since at least two thousand and six, they've gone after
Speaker 2: technical designs for things like Westinghouse nuclear reactors, US Steel Alcoa,
Speaker 2: aiming right at economic competitiveness.
Speaker 1: And domestically, China tries to control the Internet.
Speaker 2: Yes, they actively work to enforce greater control over the Internet,
Speaker 2: employing censorship that great firewall concept, and their reach is
Speaker 2: global too. Germany reported China.
Speaker 1: Using LinkedIn LinkedIn seriously yep.
Speaker 2: To target as many as ten thousand prominent German citizens,
Speaker 2: presumably gathering business and political intelligence.
Speaker 1: Wow, okay, Russia, China? What about North Korea?
Speaker 2: North Korea is known more for retaliatory or disruptive hacks.
Speaker 2: The Sony Pictures attack is the classic example.
Speaker 1: Because of that movie The Interview.
Speaker 2: Exactly, hackers breached Sony's cybersecurity, causing chaos. They released tons
Speaker 2: of proprietary and personal files info from forty seven thousand employees.
Speaker 2: The cost and disruption must have been immense.
Speaker 1: And they stole military documents too.
Speaker 2: There was a claim, yes, that North Korean hackers stole
Speaker 2: a huge trove of classified US and South Korean military documents,
Speaker 2: including apparently plans for taking out Pyongyang's leadership in a
Speaker 2: war scenario.
Speaker 1: So the takeaway for you listening this isn't just abstract
Speaker 1: stuff happening far away, not at all. These are tangible
Speaker 1: impacts on national security, on the economy, and potentially on
Speaker 1: the privacy of millions, including possibly your own data.
Speaker 2: Right it connects directly back to individual security.
Speaker 1: So how do we defend against all this, these evolving
Speaker 1: threats from states from roague groups. Let's talk defense. Maybe
Speaker 1: start with Stuxnet. That seems we had a turning point.
Speaker 2: It absolutely was code named Olympic Games. It was the
Speaker 2: world's first known physically destructive cyber attack, a collaboration reportedly
Speaker 2: between US and Israeli.
Speaker 1: Experts targeting Iran's nuclear program precisely.
Speaker 2: Its effects were dramatic. It disabled almost one thousand centrifuges
Speaker 2: nine hundred and eighty four. I think the number was
Speaker 2: set back their uranium enrichment for months, maybe a year.
Speaker 1: So it showed that cyber weapons could have real world
Speaker 1: physical consequences exactly.
Speaker 2: It was a political game changer, forced everyone to recognize
Speaker 2: this emerging power. It showed you could achieve strategic goals
Speaker 2: digitally without traditional kinetic warfare, and.
Speaker 1: The US military adapted. US Cyber Command evolved.
Speaker 2: It certainly did. In twenty sixteen, they created Joint Task
Speaker 2: Force ERRORS. That was significant because it represented the first
Speaker 2: publicly acknowledged plan by a Western military to use digital
Speaker 2: weapons alongside traditional.
Speaker 1: Combat against groups like ISIS.
Speaker 2: Yes, and the Pentagon is also trying to partner more
Speaker 2: with Silicon Valley through the Defense Innovation Unit DIUX, trying
Speaker 2: to bridge that gap between defense needs and commercial tech innovation.
Speaker 1: Bringing startup solutions to defense challenges makes.
Speaker 2: Sense, but a key takeaway, maybe the key takeaway from
Speaker 2: the sources on defense is how critical the human factor is.
Speaker 1: And all this the human factor meaning people making.
Speaker 2: Mistakes partly yes, but also leadership awareness culture. There was
Speaker 2: a Villanova University survey of MBA students. Only about ten
Speaker 2: percent felt their C suite gave cybersecurity the right level
Speaker 2: of support.
Speaker 1: Only ten percent. That's worrying.
Speaker 2: It's fully disappointing. As the source put it, and then
Speaker 2: an executive from locked In Insurance observes something stark. As
Speaker 2: many as half of their cyber insurance claims resulted from
Speaker 2: human error percent fifty percent either inadvertent mistakes or deliberate actions,
Speaker 2: often by junior or low ranking employees. It's like you know,
Speaker 2: hitting reply all on that sensitive email, but magnified massively.
Speaker 1: That's huge and it reinforces that idea from those University
Speaker 1: of Lendin researchers Atoms and strass right that users are
Speaker 1: not the enemy exactly.
Speaker 2: They found that some common security practices can actually backfire,
Speaker 2: like asking for multiple complex passwords.
Speaker 1: How did that backfire?
Speaker 2: Well, counterintuitively, it can lead to weaker security. People write
Speaker 2: them down or they create easily related passwords because they
Speaker 2: can't remember them all ah.
Speaker 1: Right, making it easier for attackers if one gets compromised.
Speaker 2: Precisely. Plus, they found that if security departments treat employees
Speaker 2: as inherently unsafe and don't share much information.
Speaker 1: Employees don't really understand why security matters exactly.
Speaker 2: They don't grasp the importance, they don't feel trusted, and
Speaker 2: security becomes just another hoop to jump through.
Speaker 1: So how do we build a stronger human defense. Then
Speaker 1: what did Adams and Strasses suggest?
Speaker 2: Pretty common sense stuff, actually make system security visible, show
Speaker 2: that it's taken seriously. Keep employees informed about existing and
Speaker 2: potential threats. Build awareness and testing. Yeah, implement red team programs,
Speaker 2: Simulate attacks to test employee attentiveness, see if they click
Speaker 2: on phishing links, that kind of thing. But do it
Speaker 2: constructively for training, It's about trust and transparency.
Speaker 1: But building that stronger human defense, it runs into another
Speaker 1: huge problem, doesn't it. Finding the people. The talent gap.
Speaker 2: Oh, it's massive, a chronic shortage of qualified cybersecurity staff.
Speaker 2: Some estimates projecting like three point five million job openings
Speaker 2: by twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: One, with zero percent unemployment in the field in the US.
Speaker 2: Basically, yeah, zero percent unemployment. Compare that to Russia. They
Speaker 2: created the Serious Center for Gifted Education and soci inspired
Speaker 2: by Putin himself.
Speaker 1: What's that.
Speaker 2: It's like a dedicated academy for top talent in science,
Speaker 2: tech arts. Students live in a former four star hotel,
Speaker 2: pop labs, and Putin reportedly monitors its progress closely. It's
Speaker 2: a very strategic long term play for developing talent.
Speaker 1: So for you listening, the bottom line, here is.
Speaker 2: It's that cybersecurity is just as much about human behavior,
Speaker 2: about organizational culture, about leadership as it is about fancy technology.
Speaker 1: Right understand, the human element is absolutely key to strengthening defenses,
Speaker 1: whether it's in your own digital life or within your organization.
Speaker 2: Couldn't agree more.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's just focus now towards the future innovation, ethics, governance.
Speaker 1: These are constantly shaping the cyber domain. First up, emerging tech,
Speaker 1: let's talk big data.
Speaker 2: Big data's impact is just sweeping. You see it everywhere
Speaker 2: like where. Well, in prese sports, it can predict when
Speaker 2: a baseball pitcher might get tired based on analyzing tons
Speaker 2: of past performance data. In healthcare, this is huge. It's
Speaker 2: moving us beyond homogenized.
Speaker 1: Medicine towards more personalized stuff.
Speaker 2: Exactly targeted treatments based on an individual's genome, even for
Speaker 2: rare cancers. Think of the lives that could save.
Speaker 1: And businesses use it too.
Speaker 2: Constantly optimizing operations, finding the best spots for new stores,
Speaker 2: whether it's fast food chains or fashion retailers, analyzing customer behavior.
Speaker 1: But there's a flip side, right, risks.
Speaker 2: Oh, definitely, there are negative couticiles. As one source put it.
Speaker 2: George Soros, the investor painted a pretty disturbing picture of
Speaker 2: the power these big data companies wield.
Speaker 1: And the Facebook issues right.
Speaker 2: Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged that breach of trust after the Cambridge
Speaker 2: Analytica scandal cost Facebook fifty billion dollars in market value
Speaker 2: in just two days. Privacy concerns are real and costly.
Speaker 1: So big data powerful but potentially problematic. What about AI
Speaker 1: and machine learning?
Speaker 2: Okay? So AI? Artificial intelligence is basically the mimicking of
Speaker 2: human thought to solve complex problems automatically. Machine learning is related.
Speaker 2: It's the ability of computers to automatically acquire new knowledge
Speaker 2: learn from data.
Speaker 1: Like with driverless cars.
Speaker 2: Perfect example, AI helps the car follow rules, make decisions
Speaker 2: based on sensors. Machine learning lets the car improve its
Speaker 2: driving over time learning from experience, and.
Speaker 1: The dental impact there is huge too.
Speaker 2: Massive projections suggest autonomous vehicles could save like six hundred
Speaker 2: and ninety thousand to one point two million lives over
Speaker 2: fifty years just by reducing human error accidents.
Speaker 1: And how are AI in machine learning used in cybersecurity itself?
Speaker 2: They're vital for anomaly spotting, detecting unusual patterns that might
Speaker 2: indicate an attack, especially those slow onset attacks that try
Speaker 2: to stand to the radar, which.
Speaker 1: Means you need the data for them to learn.
Speaker 2: From exactly, which is why longer log retention is becoming
Speaker 2: so crucial. Companies often delete logs after a few months
Speaker 2: to save space, but AI needs that history to spot
Speaker 2: subtle long term threats.
Speaker 1: Okay AI machine learning. Then there's the really mind bending
Speaker 1: one quantum computing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is revolutionary stuff. Instead of bits being zero
Speaker 2: or one, quantum computers.
Speaker 1: Use kubits and quivits can be.
Speaker 2: They can represent a one and a zero at the
Speaker 2: same time. That's called superposition, and they can be linked
Speaker 2: or correlated with each other through entanglement, which leads to
Speaker 2: enormous computing power, far far beyond anything we have today.
Speaker 1: What's the promise there? What could it do?
Speaker 2: Huge potential for things like discovering new medicines, revolutionizing healthcare,
Speaker 2: creating incredibly sophisticated financial models.
Speaker 1: But there's a dark side here too, isn't there? For
Speaker 1: cybersecurity a major one.
Speaker 2: The big threat is that a powerful quantum computer could
Speaker 2: potentially crack most of the encryption keys we rely on today.
Speaker 2: Public key in cryption.
Speaker 1: Specifically crack them how fast.
Speaker 2: Potentially in minutes, which would basically break Internet security as
Speaker 2: we know it.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's terrifying. Is there a defense, Well, people are
Speaker 1: working on it.
Speaker 2: Quantum key distribution or QKD is one developing countermeasure using
Speaker 2: quantum principles to create inherently secure communication channels.
Speaker 1: So the cyber arms race just moves to the quantum level.
Speaker 2: It seems that way. It's a constant cat and mouse game.
Speaker 1: Which brings us squarely to the challenge of governance and ethics.
Speaker 1: How do we manage all this power responsibly?
Speaker 2: That's the billion dollar question. The EU's GDPR is one
Speaker 2: major attempt. It's staggeringly complex, but it tries to provide
Speaker 2: legal direction on automated decision making and.
Speaker 1: Profiling with real teeth fines.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, heavy financial fines, and it introduces the concept
Speaker 2: of data subjects having rights over their information.
Speaker 1: Is there anything comparable historically.
Speaker 2: Well, one source draws an analogy to the UK's Health
Speaker 2: and Safety at Work Act from nineteen seventy four that
Speaker 2: combined clear principle with strong enforcement and led to an
Speaker 2: eighty six percent reduction in fatal workplace injuries over time.
Speaker 1: So principles plus enforcement can work.
Speaker 2: It suggests it can. You also see things like the
Speaker 2: Engineering Council's Statement of Ethical Principles or the IoT Security
Speaker 2: Foundation pushing principles like what like functionality without the necessary
Speaker 2: security should not be considered functional. Basically, security needs to
Speaker 2: be built in, not an afterthought, and liability lies with
Speaker 2: those who generate the.
Speaker 1: Risk, making vendors responsible. Interesting and different nations are tackling
Speaker 1: this strategically too.
Speaker 2: Yes, the US National Security Strategy from twenty seventeen had
Speaker 2: four pillars that integrated cyber considerations. The EU is taking
Speaker 2: a more proactive stance, strengthening ANISSA, their cybersecurity agency, promoting
Speaker 2: security by design, and NATO. NATO has the Tall and Manual.
Speaker 2: It's not binding law, but it's comprehensive advice from experts
Speaker 2: on how international law up or should apply in cyberspace.
Speaker 2: Trying to establish norms of.
Speaker 1: Behavior, bringing some order to the wild.
Speaker 2: West, trying to yeah, and amidst all this, you have
Speaker 2: innovation happening, which is often a messy business. Right Well,
Speaker 2: innovation isn't always linear. One expert Setel talks about four
Speaker 2: different types of innovation. Companies often use things like the
Speaker 2: seventy twenty ten model seventy percent on core stuff, twenty
Speaker 2: percent adjacent, ten percent transformational bets, and we.
Speaker 1: See innovative cybersecurity companies emerging.
Speaker 2: Absolutely like Elusive networks with their deception technology. Their whole
Speaker 2: premises assume the hackers are already inside, so instead of
Speaker 2: just building walls, they lay traps, digital decoys to lure attackers,
Speaker 2: waste their time, and trigger alerts. It's a different philosophy
Speaker 2: and CrowdStrike they use a different model again, software as
Speaker 2: a service, cloud based, using real time machine learning to
Speaker 2: analyze billions of events, constantly continuous monitoring and updating.
Speaker 1: It really is a cat and mouse game, constantly evolving.
Speaker 2: It absolutely is, and underpinning so much of this, whether
Speaker 2: it's the threats or the hype around solutions, is what
Speaker 2: one source called the human fixation with the extraordinary.
Speaker 1: We're drawn to the novel, the bizarre.
Speaker 2: Sometimes yeah, that holds a powerful fascination, and cyber definitely
Speaker 2: has its share of the extraordinary.
Speaker 1: So zooming out, What does this all mean for you,
Speaker 1: our listener?
Speaker 2: I think it shows that the decisions being made right
Speaker 2: now by governments, by businesses, decisions informed by ethics, by
Speaker 2: understanding human behavior, they're fundamentally shaping your future in this
Speaker 2: digital world.
Speaker 1: And that really wraps up our deep dive today into
Speaker 1: this incredibly complex world of cybersecurity. We've seen how the
Speaker 1: Internet transformed from that initial vision of boundless freedom into
Speaker 1: this landscape of disruption and compromise. We've explored the relentless,
Speaker 1: multi layered nature of the threats, from nations playing geopolitical
Speaker 1: games with nonlinear warfare.
Speaker 2: Espionage, to criminal organizations, even terror groups using the digital
Speaker 2: space for recruitment and propaganda. It's coming from all angles.
Speaker 1: And we've also looked at the defense side, the multifaceted
Speaker 1: efforts needed. And it's so clear, isn't it that cybersecurity
Speaker 1: goes way beyond just the technology.
Speaker 2: Oh? Absolutely, It's deeply intertwined with human behavior, with organizational culture,
Speaker 2: with robust policies, and yeah, those complex geopolitical dynamics we
Speaker 2: talked about.
Speaker 1: So as these digital capabilities keep advancing and that line
Speaker 1: between beneficial and malicious uses of information, it just gets
Speaker 1: blurrier and blurrier. Here's the final thought to leave you with,
Speaker 1: what role do your values play in shaping our collective responsibility?
Speaker 1: Our reconsibility? For creating and maintaining a safe, productive, and
Speaker 1: secure digital future for everyone.