Pete

Tech Risk, Cybersecurity, and Digital Security.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@spacerog @HockeyInJune @vyrus001 @Gillis57 @HushCon The math doesn't work for researchers. Here is the most glaring example I've found where disclosure increases risk. (Btw, the collision arg holds no weight either.)

[Pete @SpireSec]

@CBBonFOX @NDmbb please tell Kevin Kugler it was ND who won 74-70, not Nova 🤣

[Pete @SpireSec]

@jamieuyeyama I think Landon Tengwall was showing man-beater runs they checked into (sometimes) when they saw man. Might need to count those as well. I could be wrong.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@PeteSampson_ What he's really saying is ACC football is an embarrassment.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@jessesingal maybe you need your own celly to give yourself the recognition you crave? 🤣

[Pete @SpireSec]

@anton_chuvakin Vulns are mostly distractions; runtime controls stop breaches, not patches; the threat (attackers) is the bottleneck for breaches.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@VirtualTal @mike_daddino Made me wonder what the record is for number of flags thrown on a single play. I guess once you get during and after flags on both teams you can be done. Maybe ai can prove it reconcile that 🤔.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@markyzaguirre @OrinKerr Agree. No truly humble person describe themselves as humble. That's for others to decide.

It's even worse when people say they are "proud and humbled."

[Pete @SpireSec]

An open letter duel may take a while. Can I suggest a game of tic-tac-toe instead?

[Pete @SpireSec]

@AndyMasley Make a note for ten years from now to write up whether it was worth it to write this.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@grok
- create an image of what the world would look like if I were in charge, based on my tweets. Make it fun!

[Pete @SpireSec]

@anton_chuvakin That's the norm (with some variance in specific indicators). I suppose you could try "I'm surprised you meet all your compliance requirements with that strategy."

[Pete @SpireSec]

@BarstoolPhilly I'm hoping it's a long con

[Robert Graham @robertgraham]

It seems clear from a legal point of view.

It's also clear from a cybersecurity point of view. We want out-of-control AIs hacking the Internet as long as they aren't doing any damage. The more this happens, the more systems get secure, and the less threat from a superintelligent AI doing real damage.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@VincentGeloso not sure...

[Pete @SpireSec]

@AndyMasley I.e. it actually *does* take a fanciful imagination.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@AndyMasley Very few people are connecting the dots between a breach with no real world impact and mass extinction of the human species, and rightly so. It's a very large stretch. Spend more time on the incident scenarios.

[Pete @SpireSec]

@francip @AndyMasley @zetalyrae Yes, it does. But you won't change people's minds who disagree.

[Kip Viscusi @WKipViscusi]

My new paper on "The Value of a Statistical Life Year" finds that government agencies sometimes understate the VSLY. The VSLY varies with age, the discount rate, and how it is estimated. Climate change impacts are undervalued. https://t.co/LGGCB8pOOz

[Pete @SpireSec]

@JamesSurowiecki @IrateSocrates did you see the original?

[Pete @SpireSec]

@robertgraham It's a pattern that has been followed for fifty years. Not explicitly foreseeable, perhaps, but that's the nature of probabilistic algorithms. A known unknown. You're being triggered by the word "malicious" that's all. Everything else is accurate.