State of Cybercrime

Manifesting Chaos or a Security Risk? Jan 24, 2018

Show notes

Regular listeners of the Inside Out Security podcast know that our panelists can’t agree on much. Well, when bold allegations that IT is the most problematic department in an organization can be, ahem, controversial.

But whether you love or hate IT, we can’t deny that technology has made significant contributions to our lives. For instance, grocery stores are now using a system, order-to-shelf, to reduce food waste. There are apps to help drivers find alternate routes if they’re faced with a crowded freeway. Both examples are wonderful use cases, but also have had unforeseen side effects.

Even though profits are up, empty aisles at grocery stores are frustrating shoppers as well as employees. Quiet neighborhoods that became alternate routes are experiencing traffic due to a new influx of drivers as well as noise pollution.

When there are unforeseen consequences from a technological improvement, are we manifesting chaos or a security risk?

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

The Security of Legacy Systems Jan 19, 2018

Show notes

It’s our first show of 2018 and we kicked off the show with predictions that could potentially drive headline news. By doing so, we’re figuring out different ways to prepare and prevent future cybersecurity attacks.

What’s notable is that IBM set up a cybersecurity lab, where organizations can experience what it’s like go through a cyberattack without any risk to their existing production system. This is extremely helpful for companies with legacy systems that might find it difficult to upgrade for one reason or another. But we can all agree what’s truly difficult are the technologies that you can’t just fix with a patch, such as the Spectre and Meltdown attacks.

Other articles discussed: Hotmail changed Microsoft and email

Panelists: Cindy Ng, Kris Keyser, Kilian Englert

Want to join us live? Save a seat here: https://www.varonis.com/state-of-cybercrime

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

Chief Data Officer Richard Wendell: Information as an Asset (Part 1) Jan 02, 2018

Show notes

The emergence of Chief Data Officers(CDO) demonstrates the growing recognition of information as an asset. In fact, Gartner says that 90% of large organizations will have a CDO by 2019.

To understand the CDO role more deeply, I turned to Richard Wendell.

I met Mr. Wendell last year at the Chief Data Officer Summit and thought his background and expertise would help us understand the critical role a CDO plays in managing an organization’s data.

Mr. Wendell is a is a founding Member of the Board of Directors of MIT’s International Society for Chief Data Officers (ISCDO). Under his leadership, he has helped create and shape the de facto community of senior executives responsible for maximizing the opportunities in data-driven decision making. Prior to ISCDO, Mr. Wendell spent two and a half years as the Vice President of Data Science and Strategic Analytics for Tyco Electronics.

In this first part in a series of podcasts, Mr. Wendell defines the role of a CDO, the value a CDO brings to an organization and what a CDO needs to do in order to thrive.

Transcript

Responsibilities of a Chief Data Officer

Inside Out Security: With over two decades worth of experience working with Fortune 500 organizations, Mr. Richard Wendell has constructed data science teams from scratch and pioneered organizations moving into advanced analytics. His methodology has been able to impact revenue streams by executing a data strategy to deepen customer insights and relationships.

Most recently, Mr. Wendell is a founding member of the board of directors of MIT's International Society for Chief Data Officers.

I'm thrilled to have Richard Wendell join us today to tell us more about the goals of a CDO. Because, according to Gartner, by 2019, 90% of large organizations will have a Chief Data Officer.

Richard: Sure, Cindy, happy to. So, the world around us is changing very, very fast. Particularly, when you start talking about information and technology. So, just out of curiosity I went and I was looking at Google Analytics and Google Trends and some search terms for "chief data officer." And the first blip that we start seeing of any significance around "chief data officer" searches came in late 2011. Then we start to see another uptick in 2012.

And, more or less, since 2013, up through current time, the searches on Google for the word "chief data officer" are growing at 100% compound annual growth rate. So, really substantial uptick.

Like many areas in its early days, there are some different meanings for what people mean by chief data officer and the areas of responsibility.

What we're seeing, different flavors of chief data officers, but by and large they could be characterized in sort of two buckets, the defensive chief data officer and the offensive chief data officer.

Defensive CDOs, often there are a lot of them in financial services. They're more responsible typically for data governance, reporting, regulatory, and really critical functions.

Quite different from the offensive CDOs we're seeing. Offensive CDOs still can be in financial services, but increasingly in other sectors, like life sciences and retail and CPG, are focusing on transforming companies that want to be, 20th century companies that want to be 21st century companies. So really, transforming the enterprise around data and analytics. Coming out with new ways of using data, data science to create insights that are truly going to be transformational for the way that business conducts itself into the future.

You can see, both called CDOs, but two very, very different missions and mandates.

Aggregating Data, Analyzing Data, Acting on Data

Inside Out Security: So, what types of insights are CDOs being tasked with looking for?

Richard: So, the answer to that question is part, I think, very largely the job of the CDO, right?

So, quite often a CDO, particularly offensive CDOs, their job starts like this: a CEO or a CFO or maybe a CMO says,

"We want our company to use data science. We want our company to be more data driven, and we want to start capitalizing on these new technologies. Go figure out what that means for us."

And so...and that's quite often the beginning point for a chief data officer. Now, I think on a high level, in my mind, particularly the more...the chief data officers who are looking to drive transformation and innovation have to really successfully string together three critical areas:

They have to aggregate data
They have to analyze the data, and
They have to get the business to act on the data.

So this “triple A” framework is so important. So I think that...and I would just say that if you get two out of three of those right, you fail.

You really...in the beginning, the value chain is raw data, and at the end is raw dollars.

If you want to get from raw data to raw dollars, you have to check all three of those boxes. And, so many organizations focus on that middle slice, the analysis piece, the insights piece. Insight is incredibly important, but insight's only one of those three boxes.

How CDOs Leverage Data to Impact the Bottomline

Inside Out Security: How important is the data? Because, that's the name in your job title, CDO.

Richard: Yeah, yeah, I mean data is absolutely critical for sure. I mean data is the raw material, the building blocks on which everything else is contingent. So I would argue that data is critical, necessary, but not sufficient.

At the end of the day…creating the right data that is ready for analysis and driving insight is really, really challenging. I don't want to undermine the really intense hard work that comes out of figuring out what to do when your enterprise has many, many data centers. Or, hit legacy ETL scripting that is indecipherable and not well documented.

These are just two of the many challenges that Chief Data Officers face in creating good quality data. I would just say though, that businesses are here to make money. That could mean different things. It could be on the P&L side, on revenue and growth like you're talking about. Or, it could be cost savings efficiencies, right? Or, it could also be over on the balance sheet.

There are many, many fantastic data and analytics use cases that don't hit the P&L, but hit maybe it's a reduction in inventory that flows over to a cash savings on the balance sheet. Or, increase in customer lifetime value, which has many intangible effects.

So, I think really, across all the company financials, it's really the job of a chief data officer to understand business strategy, corporate strategy well enough to say,"What is the company's strategy? Are we here to accelerate revenue and growth? Are we here to transform our industry? Or, are we here to drive efficiencies?"

And then, based on that corporate strategy, figure out where the right strategic levers across the P&L and the balance sheet. And then, what data has to be put together, prepared in what way, and used in what combination with analytics to drive those strategic levers.

Inside Out Security: And for the CDO to highlight, okay here's why you brought me in. Here's what's important to the company. Here's how we'll achieve, and here's the roadmap to where we want to go.

Richard: Yeah, and you know, here's the money that we're making because I'm here. I think that one of the critical, sort of in my opinion, one of the critical success factors of a chief data officer is being able to translate between the technical language of data and analytics, and the maybe less technical but equally important language of business and strategy.

So, when you are talking to a CEO or a Board of Directors or a CFO or a CMO or whoever it may be, you're not speaking geek all the time, right?

You're speaking to them in a language that they understand, and you're talking to them about making money. Which, ultimately, most businesses are around to make money.

Inside Out Security: And really, for this CDO to speak their language too.

Richard: So important, being a good listener. I think that CDOs really...in order to know where to focus and prioritize the really, frankly, expensive investments in data and analytics that companies are making - it's so important to be able to listen to one's stakeholders, be it the GMs or presidents of a large business unit or the chief marketing officer.

But really, those partners who are ultimately going to be critical to the adoption of the insights that are created out of data and analytics, that translate those insights into action, and ultimately money.

Listening to them and what are their priorities is such a really important first starting point. Because at the end of the day if...we could be creating the coolest data asset in the world, but if it's not generating insights that people care about or want to act on, it's hypothetical.

Relationship between CDO and CMO

Inside Out Security: Tell us about the relationship between a CDO and a chief marketing officer.

Richard: The relationship with a chief marketing officer is really critical.

I mean it's very different for different kinds of companies. Obviously, consumer companies have very different marketing focus than B-to-B companies, so I can't 100% generalize all the time.

But by and large, marketing is on the front end of the business.

Marketing often owns the customers. Marketing is quite often either responsible for customer acquisition, or closely partnered with sales, and jointly responsible for customer acquisition. And increasingly, responsible for the digital channels, so the web channels to the customer, and other digital channels.

And those digital channels have a lot of data, and a lot of analytics.

And, what has happened in a lot of companies is the marketing teams have built up their own sort of ownership of customer data. Be it CRM data, be it digital web data, and maybe even some of their own specialized analytics around how to leverage that data to get the right insights from a marketing perspective. All good things, all very good things, but from a different perspective you could also think of that as a silo.

So, what happens in a company where at the end of the day...say the company is manufacturing a product, right?

Maybe it's the case that getting up the product that you make to your customer quickly is the largest driver of customer satisfaction and customer lifetime. So, makes sense. People want to get their things quickly, that they buy, right? That's Amazon's model.

So, well what if...and a lot of these companies...how quickly...how much of a product you manufacture, and how much inventory you store is more on the operations side. So, what to do in a company where that more operation or transaction data resides either in operations or in IT, and marketing has digital data.

But at the end of the day, the company wants to do the right things for its customers. It wants to get the customers, in this example, their products quickly. Well, in this kind of...this is a perfect example. I've seen it many times. And this is where a chief data officer comes in.

A chief data officer's primary job is breaking down these silos and helping a company optimize all of its data and analytics through different groups to get to its strategy.

Want to join us live? Save a seat here: https://www.varonis.com/state-of-cybercrime

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

Who is in Control? The Data or Humans? Dec 19, 2017

Show notes

Self-quantified trackers made possible what was once nearly unthinkable: for individuals to gather data on one’s activity level in order to manage and improve one’s performance. Some have remarked that self-quantified devices can hinge on the edge of over management. As we wait for more research reports on the right dose of self-management, we’ll have to define for ourselves what the right amount of self-quantifying is.

Meanwhile, it seems that businesses are also struggling with a similar dilemma: measuring the right amount of risk and harm as it relates to security and privacy.

Acting FTC Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen said at a recent privacy and security workshop, “In making policy determinations, injury matters. ... If we want to manage privacy and data security injuries, we need to be able to measure them."

A clearly defined measurement of risk and harm will become ever so important as the business world embrace deep learning and eventually artificial intelligence.

Other articles discussed:

Recovering “deleted” logs
Other perspectives on artificial intelligence
Transparency in algorthims required to curve bias

Panelists: Cindy Ng, Kilian Englert, Mike Thompson, Kris Keyser

Want to join us live? Save a seat here: https://www.varonis.com/state-of-cybercrime

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

Security and Privacy Concerns with Chatbots, Trackers, and more Dec 07, 2017

Show notes

The end of the year is approaching and security pros are making their predictions for 2018 and beyond. So are we! This week, our security practitioners predicted items that will become obsolete because of IoT devices. Some of their guesses - remote controls, service workers, and personal cars.

Meanwhile, as the business world phase out old technologies, some are embracing the use of new ones. For instance, many organizations today use chatbots. Yes, they’ll help improve customer service. But some are worried that when financial institutions embrace chatbots to facilitate payments, cyber criminals will see it as an opportunity to impersonate users and take over their accounts.

And what about trackers found in apps bundled with DNA testing kits? From a developer’s perspective, all the trackers help improve the usability of an app, but does that mean we’ll be sacrificing security and privacy?

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

The Challenges and Promise of Digital Drugs Nov 22, 2017

Show notes

Recently the Food and Drug Administration approved the first digital pill. This means that medicine embedded with a sensor can tell health care providers – doctors and individuals the patient approves – if the patient takes his medication. The promise is huge. It will ensure a better health outcome for the patient, giving caretakers more time with the ones they love. What’s more, by learning more about how a drug interacts with a human system, researchers might find a way to prevent illnesses that was once believed impossible to cure. However, as security pros there are some in the industry that believe that the potential for abuse might overshadow the promise of what could be.

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

Bring Back Dedicated and Local Security Teams Nov 08, 2017

Show notes

Last week, I came across a tweet that asked how a normal user is supposed to make an informed decision when a security alert shows up on his screen. Great question!

I found a possible answer to that question at New York Times director of infosecurity, Runa Sandvik’s recent keynote at the O’Reilly Security Conference.

She told the attendees that many moons ago, Yahoo had three types of infosecurity departments: core, dedicated and local.

Core was the primary infosec department. The dedicated group were subject matter experts on security, still on the infosec department, but worked with other teams to help them conduct their activities in a secure way. The security pros on the local group are not officially on the infosec department, but they’re the security experts on another team.

Who knew that once upon a time dedicated and local security teams existed?! It would make natural sense that they would be the ones to assist end users on security questions, why don’t we bring them back? The short answer: it’s not so simple.

Other articles discussed:

More to life than convenience?
Firefox gives users privacy option
Neural network renders faces that doesn’t exist

Panelists: Cindy Ng, Kilian Englert, Forrest Temple, Matt Radolec

Want to join us live? Save a seat here: https://www.varonis.com/state-of-cybercrime

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com

Rita Gurevich, CEO of SPHERE Technology Solutions Nov 02, 2017

Show notes

Long before cybersecurity and data breaches became mainstream, founder and CEO of SPHERE Technology Solutions, Rita Gurevich built a thriving business on the premise of assisting organizations secure their most sensitive data from within, instead of securing the perimeter from outside attackers. And because of her multi-faceted experiences interacting with the C-Suite, technology vendors, and others in the business community, we thought listening to her singular perspective would be well worth our time. What stood out in our podcast interview? When others are concerned about limited security budgets, Gurevich envisioned more hands on deck in the field of information security. The reason is that there are more and varied threats, oversaturated vendors in the marketplace, and a cybersecurity workforce shortage. “What I see happening is that there’s going to be subject matter CISOs across the company; where there will be many people with that title that become experts in very specific domains.” Also, now that cybersecurity concerns are not as industry specific, Gurevich does recognize that there are certain industries that are more at risk than others. She approaches all industries with varying degrees of risk and threats, compliance requirements, and disparate systems all in a strategic way – by giving organizations the visibility into their data and systems, what they need to protect and how they need to protect it. Transcript Cindy Ng: Long before data breaches became mainstream, Rita Gurevich, CEO of SPHERE Technology Solutions built a thriving business on the premise of assisting organizations secure their most sensitive data from within. And because of her multifaceted experiences interacting with the C-Suite, technology vendors and others in the business community, we thought listening to her singular perspective would be well worth our time. Rita, you founded SPHERE in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis when you were just 25 years old. Can you tell us about the process behind how you started your business and what kind of services you provide. Rita Gurevich: Absolutely, I started the company, essentially, on the collapse of Lehman Brothers. And after the bankruptcy, there were many different firms that bought different areas of Lehman. And I was put on a team to help figure out how to split apart all the different data and assets they owned. So if you can imagine, up until that point. Lehman was super centralized. It was operating as one company, with lots of shared services. And overnight, we essentially had to figure out who gets what. So Barclay’s Capital bought a part of the business. Numera bought a part of the business. Neuberger bought a part of the business. All these different financial services firm that bought different business units from Lehman Brothers. And what we had to do, was essentially a crash course on deep data analytics. We had to learn how to get a really quick understanding of who uses what, map that to different business entities, to figure out where it needs to go. So that required a lot of tools, a lot of metrics. We built all these algorithms. And we had to do it almost overnight. And soon after, slightly a traumatic time, in the history of our country, I had a bit of an ‘aha’ moment when decided to do some independent consulting. I quickly built a business, and now we focus on cyber security. We have a niche around data governance, identity, and access management, as well as privilege access management. And a lot of the experience that I gained at Lehman was very relevant for what I do now, because you essentially had to figure out how do I capture the information that's necessary from my environment to create metrics and analytics that are relevant to making sure my information is secure, understanding who owns what, and even potentially preparing myself for some M&A activities. Cindy Ng: And so, can you describe your work at Lehman Brothers and how that you made the connection that it was important to start your business. Rita Gurevich: Sure. So, during that time, during the bankruptcy, it was really all about data analytics. It was really about looking at all the different data, all the different assets that Lehman owned and figuring out, "Okay, who gets what?" So, if Barkley's bought investment banking, how do you know what data belongs to investment banking? If Neuberger Berman bought investment management, the investment management business, how do you figure out what data belongs to investment management? So, it was all around going really deep into the data, and using the right tools to capture all the metadata, all the activity, so you can gain an understanding of who's using it? Who owns it? and where does it need to go? So, at that time, not a lot of companies were doing that, and there wasn't really a lot of need to do that at the time. But around 2008-2009, there was just so much movement within financial services. And there was so much happening in terms of companies going bankrupt, being acquired by other companies, all these different businesses kind of spinning up, and changing, and moving hands that this concept became a lot more relevant. So, when I started the company, it really was around selling myself and my experience that I learned, which was very unique at the time. But over the course of not a very long amount of time, probably two years or so, the focus definitely shifted. So, initially I was talking to infrastructure people, I was talking to operations people, and I was talking about data analytics. And while it was definitely a nice to have, and people cared about it. Budgets were really tight. We're still knee-deep in one of the worst recessions in our country. So where are the budgets, where are people focusing, where are, you know, the executives and the board members, you know, allocating resources? And that was for information security. So around 2009-2010, I think the concept of data breaches became a lot more relevant. It became more, kind of, a commonly used word. Companies were starting to actually hire chief information security officers. They were starting to look at data analytics from a security perspective. They wanted to get a better handle to prevent data getting into the wrong hands, and that's when I shifted the focus from data analytics to data security. And I think that was monumental for me, because really that's the premise of what my company does today around the data governance program that we implement. So I think that my experience at Lehman was definitely a blessing in disguise, but I think that probably anybody that was focusing on data analytics, even tangentially, started to think about data security as well. Cindy Ng: You were 25 when you first started your business. A lot of your college cohorts they were still on their first, second, or third job. Was that relevant or you looked at the opportunity and ran with it? Rita Gurevich: I think that my age was probably one of my biggest challenges when it came to starting my business and definitely in the earlier years. And you can only imagine, you know, a 25 year old walking into a managing director's office, and essentially telling them that they can do a better job than his team can do. That's a really difficult thing to say, and you gotta prove it. So, once you actually start working for them, you better do a good job, which luckily I did and my team did. But as I compare to my other college cohorts, I actually think that because I went to Stevens Institute of Technology, in Hoboken, New Jersey. My business is in Jersey City. My customers are international, but quite a few of them have headquarters in this kind of tri-state area. A lot of my college peers went on to work at all these different companies that could be potential customers at Sphere. So, I think actually it created an opportunity for me because it opened the door to have the right conversations with people in technology to explain, you know, what I'm working on, and what I'm doing. And, you know, part of having a successful business is not just a good idea, but it's having people that you can actually sell to, having a relevant problem that's gonna help people in their professional careers and their professional lives. So I think that my relationship from school and being not so far off from graduating college helped more than hurt. But also from the Lehman bankruptcy, like I mentioned earlier, it was a time where there was a lot of movement, and a lot of people went to all sorts of different firms on the street. And it was different than how it used to be in the past, where people stayed at the same company for a really long time. That movement essentially for me, created an overnight network, where I was able to kind of leverage people that I knew and had worked with for a handful of years across all sorts of different companies within the demographic that I was targeting. So, yeah, I think that the age was definitely sometimes a challenge, but I actually found ways to have it be a benefit as well. Cindy Ng: But in terms of age, it's almost non-relevant as long as you have a value proposition, and people are interested. Rita Gurevich: That's a really, really good point. So, there's kind of two aspects to it, right? So, if you have something interesting to say, that's great, but the way you communicate that message is almost more important, and there has to be a confidence in the way that you present the problem that you're solving and your solution that's going to set you apart from others that are knocking on the same people's doors, maybe for different areas, but are competing for the attention of the people that you're trying to get in front of. So, I call that, you know, learn confidence. I can't honestly say that at 25 I felt like I knew everything. I knew I didn't, but you have to be able to present yourself in a way where the person on the other side of the table knew that, even if you don't know the answer, you will figure it out, and the other part of that is perseverance. You have to make sure that you continuously have your goals in mind and push forward. You know, I mentioned that my company focuses on security, and while that's still relevant and even in 2008, 2009, 2010, it was also very relevant. You can imagine that the people that are in charge of security at these companies have lots of vendors, and lots of partners, and lots of even internal people, knocking on their door vying for their time. So you have to just make sure that your message comes across strong and that, again, there's a confidence in your approach, and you will deliver when push comes to shove. Cindy Ng: And when you talk about your learned confidence, when a meeting didn't go as planned, or a presentation didn't go as planned, what was your self-talk like? Rita Gurevich: That’s a great question. So I’ve learned that you have to listen more than you speak. You’re going to learn a lot through osmosis. Just by being in a room, where the conversation is happening. You’re just going to learn and get better. Sometimes, it’s just echoing a common opinion or a common sentiment that the other person has on the other side of the table, and reaffirming them that you’ve also experienced the same problem that they’re sharing. Or you’ve seen it somewhere else. Or you’ve solved that problem with a peer of theirs. So I think that learned confidence isn’t necessarily about having memorized specific compliance requirement or a specific way of doing some task. It’s more about doing a thing more logically. And if you don’t know, it’s okay not to know. Just make sure your follow up and follow through is there. No one expects experts. Data security and cybersecurity as a whole is a very new area. Everyone is learning as we go. It’s all common knowledge. But it’s can you think of solutions in a creative way and that you’re solving the problems that people are having. And sometimes, it’s not reinventing the wheel. Sometimes it’s solving an existing problem in a smarter and more scalable, and a more efficient way. I’ve learned that by failing sometimes. You don’t have to come up with an idea that no one thought of. You just have to come up with a more practical way of doing things sometimes. And the other bit of advice and something that I really believe in is, is becoming kind of a master of some things. So, instead of the "jack-of-all-trades", focusing in on something and becoming really good at it, and, you know, that's what I did. So I call Sphere a cybersecurity company, but we're actually pretty niche. We focus on internal threats, and we specifically focus on putting controls on your data, your systems, and your assets. So, it's a very kind of narrow piece of the pie when you look at cybersecurity as a whole, but that allows my team, and that allows me to train new personnel really, really effectively because you can hone in on very specific topics. You can give real world examples of very specific things, and people can really start to grasp, you know, the complicated challenges that we're solving, but also think of them in a more simplistic, logical way. You know, all these technology challenges from data breaches and around, you know, hackers and all that, it feels very complicated. It really does, but when you break it apart and remove the technical jargon, the problems and the reasons these things are happening are not overly technically challenging problems. A lot of them are profits driven, they're people driven. They're not necessarily about, you know, the right configuration of a tool within, you know, this specific domain. It's a much more kind of systematic issue. So, I think when you start to gain an understanding of this base, you start to figure that out pretty quickly. Cindy Ng: On top of starting your business at a really young age, there aren't a whole lot of females in the industry, and we talk a lot about women in tech, but, you know, I wonder how can men join the conversation, because they coexist with us on this planet, and I wanted to hear your perspective in how we can enlist men as allies in our industry? Rita Gurevich: I definitely get asked a lot about this topic, because, you're right, there's not a lot of women in tech, and to be honest there's not a lot of women CEO's either, so you kind of merge women, tech, CEO. I guess, I'm a little bit of an anomaly, but I'm hoping that's not for very long. I think honestly we need to stop caring that the person that's joining the conversation is a woman, and we know that there's going to be equality, and we're not forcing that distinction. And I think more and more women are getting involved in technology early on. And technology is part of nearly every child's life right now independent of gender, and I think that naturally maybe the next 10 to 20 years. It's gonna cause dramatic shifts in ratios in the tech workplace. And I really think that tech is going to be early adopters of inclusiveness of women and inclusiveness across the board. Technology is very interesting because it's analytical thinking, it's problem solving, researching. Definitely mixed in sometimes with creativity and out of the box thinking. Maybe I'm partial, but I think these are natural traits of women, and in the end if you work for a big company, managers want successful teams, and their managers want successful orgs, and women will rise through the ranks as there's just going to be more of them in the running. Unfortunately, I think that other industries are not as fortunate. And I bring up two specific women whenever I talk about this topic. One, I met at a panel I was on, "Women In En…

Full show notes at the publisher

The Moral Obligation of Machines and Humans Oct 24, 2017

Show notes

Critical systems once operated by humans are now becoming more dependent on code and developers. There are many benefits to machines and automation such as increased productivity, quality and predictability.

But when websites crash, 911 systems go down or when radiation-therapy machines kill patients because of a software error, it’s vital that we rethink our relationship with code and as well as the moral obligations of machines and humans.

Should developers who create software that impact humans be required to take a ‘do no harm’ ethics training? Should we begin measuring developers by the functionality they create as well as security and moral frameworks they’re able to provide?

Other articles discussed:

The Parable Of The Paperclip Maximizer
Krack Attack
The Trolley Problem
Secret Database Hack
Cryptographic failure

Tool of the week: Assemblyline: Files go in, and a handful of small helper applications automatically comb through each one in search of malicious clues.

Panelists: Cindy Ng, Kilian Englert, Kris Keyser, Mike Buckbee

Want to join us live? Save a seat here: https://www.varonis.com/state-of-cybercrime

More from Varonis ⬇️

Visit our website: https://www.varonis.com