Red Team Journal

Beyond probabilistic forecasting. We've retired the site, but we're still active professionally.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Why does it feel like not much decent strategic red teaming has been happening since we last engaged here? Anyone remember our Red Teaming "Law" No. 1?

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

We say we want to be challenged, but the hesitation often starts before a stress test or red team even takes off. People hold back, answers get polished.

Anyone else notice how quickly the temperature shifts when the real questions enter the room? Curious what you've seen.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

I'm starting the week with one of our original cards (2014):

Red Teaming "Law" 26 ("Sneer"): Never regard your adversary with contempt. No good can come of it. The superiority you feel is never worth the surprise that invariably follows.

Keep on red teaming, my friends!

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Here's the first new Red Team Journal "law" card in a few years!

Watch for a new card weekly. If the response is positive, we might even open a version of the site just to host the cards, which, incidentally, will need to be renumbered as we likely drop some and renumber others.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

If you remember the old Red Team Journal "Laws" and Cards, chime in. Would you be interested in some new ones?

(It feels like we don't get much traction on this platform, but then again, we don't engage much here anymore.)

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

And "Law" no. 1 often leads to no. 26 ("Sneer"): "Never regard your adversary with contempt. No good can come of it. The superiority you feel is not worth the surprise that invariably follows."

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Yes, we retired the site. Yes, we have thoughts about what's going on now. And yes, Red Teaming "Law" no. 1 still retains its top position:

"The more powerful the stakeholders, the more at stake, the less interest in red teaming."

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Yes, we retired the site. Yes, we have thoughts about what's going on now. And yes, Red Teaming "Law" no. 1 still retains its top position:

"The more powerful the stakeholders, the more at stake, the less interest in red teaming."

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

(2/5) The 5-Point Risk Scan (in reverse order):

2. The Disproof: What could change our minds?

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

(3/5) The 5-Point Risk Scan (in reverse order):

3. The Given: What do we assume won't change?

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

(4/5) The 5-Point Risk Scan (in reverse order):

4. The Warning: If this goes amiss, what's the first sign?

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

(5/5) Something from the old days of Red Team Journal that never goes out of style . . .

The 5-Point Risk Scan (in reverse order):

5. The Penalty: What's the downside if we're wrong?

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

One version in English of an interesting quote attributed to Schopenhauer:

“Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see.”

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

We always valued the red teamers who appreciated being challenged and/or corrected because they learned something new or learned to see something differently.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Is FUD real? Is the implied risk behind it real? Do you want to take the chance it’s not? That’s for you and your adversary to work out.

https://t.co/o8YIH0HpWJ

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

@AugustVansickl2 Maybe.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

Something to think about:

Different stakeholders are likely to think in different time scales. It can lead to people talking past each other and not realizing why.

- See the first chapter of Freeman Dyson's book *Weapons and Hope*

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

@that_sec_guy We agree in principle. That's what it *should* be. Unfortunately, we've seen plenty of red teaming that's limited a desire to constrain the red team to known and manageable risks. Your mileage may vary. If you've seen good ways of breaking through this barrier, please share.

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

“If you want James Bond, go to a library. If you want a successful operation, sit at your desk and think, and then think again.”

- Neil Burnside, the fictional DO of the British SIS in the television show The Sandbaggers. This quote is from the episode “First Principles.”

[Red Team Journal @redteamjournal]

@jorgeorchilles @joevest After all, technical operations are almost always wrapped in layers of bureaucracy, parochial interests, habit, misperception, wishful thinking, etc.