Exabeam: A Remarkable Claim
October 25, 2022
I read “Exabeam New Scale SIEM Enables Security Teams to Detect the Undetectable.” I find the idea expressed in the headline interesting. A commercial firm can spot something that cannot be seen; that is, detect the undetectable. The write up states as a rock solid factoid:
Claimed to be an industry first, Exabeam New-Scale SIEM allows security teams to search query responses across petabytes of hot, warm and cold data in seconds. Organizations can use the service to process logs with limitless scale at sustained speeds of more than 1 million events per second. Key to Exabeam’s offering is the ability to understand normal behavior to detect and prioritize anomalies. Exabeam New-Scale SIEM offers more than 1,800 pre-built correlation rules and more than 1,100 anomaly detection rules that leverage in excess of 750 behavior analytics detection models, which baseline normal behavior.
The write up continues with a blizzard of buzzwords; to wit:
The full list of new Exabeam products includes Security Log Management — cloud-scale log management to ingest, parse, store and search log data with powerful dashboarding and correlation. Exabeam SIEM offers cloud-native SIEM at hyperscale with modern search and powerful correlation, reporting, dashboarding and case management, and Exabeam Fusion provides New-Scale SIEM powered by modern, scalable security log management, powerful behavioral analytics and automated TDIR, according to the company. Exabeam Security Analytics provides automated threat detection powered by user and entity behavior analytics with correlation and threat intelligence. Exabeam Security Investigation is powered by user and entity behavior analytics, correlation rules and threat intelligence, supported by alerting, incident management, automated triage and response workflows.
Now this is not detecting the undetectable. The approach relies on processing data quickly, using anomaly detection methods, and pre-formed rules.
By definition, a pre formed rule is likely to have a tough time detecting the undetectable. Bad actors exploit tried and true security weaknesses, rely on very tough to detect behaviors like a former employee selling a bad actor information about a target’s system, and new exploits cooked up in the case of NSO Group in a small mobile phone shop or in a college class in Iran.
What is notable in the write up is:
The use of SIEM without explaining that the acronym represents “security information and event management.” The bound phrase “security information” means the data marking an exploit or attack. And “event management” means what the cyber security professionals do when the attack succeeds. The entire process is reactive; that is, only after something bad has been identified can action be taken. No awareness means the attack can move forward and continue. The idea of “early warning” means one thing, and detect the undetectable is quite another.
Who is responsible for this detect the undetectable? My view is that it is an art history major now working in marketing.
Detecting the undetectable. More like detecting sloganized marketing about a very serious threat to organizations hungry for dashboarding.
Stephen E Arnold, October 25, 2022
Does Apple Evoke Fear?
October 20, 2022
Fast Company points out how Apple is appealing to America’s overwhelming culture of fear in: “Apple Used To Sell Wonder. Now It Sells Fear.” For forty years, Apple has presented itself as an optimistic brand of the future. Its aesthetic and state-of-the-art technology was and is supposed to improve our lives.
Under Jony Ive’s design lead, Apple has taken to upholding Murphy’s Law by selling fear. Apple’s newest marketing campaign promotes how its technology is used by survivors. Commercials and other advertising feature tales of survival from heart attacks to plane crashes. All these people survived thanks to an Apple product, usually the Apple Watch. The watch even has a new car crash feature that is supposed to make people feel safer:
“Do note that Crash Detection, which is part of the new Apple Watch Series 8, won’t prevent any accidents from happening, of course. But that wasn’t Apple’s point. These examples implied something else entirely: The world is already on fire. You’re already getting burned. Just make sure that you live to tell the tale.”
A great example is the new Apple Watch Ultra which was specifically designed for outdoor exploration with a compass and bright international orange accents that help wearers be noticed in emergencies. Apple also quoted Sir Ernest Shackleton’s alleged advertisement for an Antarctica expedition to appeal to consumers: “…describing a ‘hazardous journey’ with ‘long months of complete darkness, constant danger.’ While ‘safe return [is] doubtful,’ the ad admitted, it promised ‘honor and recognition in case of success.’”
Apple is telling consumers life sucks, but use its products to make it better. Another way to broach the new advertising campaign is Apple wants people to go outside and exercise more as a response to the growing obesity endemic. Maybe it’s Apple’s way of telling people to exercise safely?
Whitney Grace, October 20, 2022
The Zuck with Legs: Just a Demo?
October 18, 2022
Slashdot ran an interesting item on October 14, 2022. The title of the post was “Facebook’s Legs Video Was a Lie.” According to the short item, this factoid was reported: As UploadVR’s Ian Hamilton has since reported, Meta has issued a follow-up statement, which says, “To enable this preview of what’s to come, the segment [Zuck’s demo] featured animations created from motion capture.”
Did you ever hear the joke about Bill Gates who had to choose between heaven and hell. He examined both destinations and chose the location with babes, great location, and close friends like a construct that looked like Gary Kildall and another emulating Jeffrey Epstein. Mr. Gates chose the one with babes and palls. When Mr. Gates passed to heaven, he ended up in a horrible place with hell fire and demons. He called Saint Peter (God was in a meeting) and asked, “What happened to the place with good weather, my pals and babes?” The response, “That was a demo.”
My hunch is that the Zuck’s final destination will be a 360 degree immersive TikTok stream. Legs may not be part of the equation.
Stephen E Arnold, October 18, 2022
Webb Wobbles: Do Other Data Streams Stumble Around?
October 4, 2022
I read an essay identified as an essay from The_Byte In Futurism with the content from Nature. Confused? I am.
The title of the article is “Scientists May Have Really Screwed Up on Early James Webb Findings.” The “Webb” is not the digital construct, but the space telescope. The subtitle about the data generated from the system is:
I don’t think anybody really expected this to be as big of an issue as it’s becoming.
Space is not something I think about. Decades ago I met a fellow named Fred G., who was engaged in a study of space warfare. Then one of my colleague Howard F. joined my team after doing some satellite stuff with a US government agency. He didn’t volunteer any information to me, and I did not ask. Space may be the final frontier, but I liked working on online from my land based office, thank you very much.
The article raises an interesting point; to wit:
When the first batch of data dropped earlier this summer, many dived straight into analysis and putting out papers. But according to new reporting by Nature, the telescope hadn’t been fully calibrated when the data was first released, which is now sending some astronomers scrambling to see if their calculations are now obsolete. The process of going back and trying to find out what parts of the work needs to be redone has proved “thorny and annoying,” one astronomer told Nature.
The idea is that the “Webby” data may have been distorted, skewed, or output with knobs and dials set incorrectly. Not surprisingly those who used these data to do spacey stuff may have reached unjustifiable conclusions. What about those nifty images, the news conferences, and the breathless references to the oldest, biggest, coolest images from the universe?
My thought is that the analyses, images, and scientific explanations are wrong to some degree. I hope the data are as pure as online clickstream data. No, no, strike that. I hope the data are as rock solid as mobile GPS data. No, no, strike that too. I hope the data are accurate like looking out the window to determine if it is a clear or cloudy day. Yes, narrowed scope, first hand input, and a binary conclusion.
Unfortunately in today’s world, that’s not what data wranglers do on the digital ranch.
If the “Webby” data are off kilter, my question is:
What about the data used to train smart software from some of America’s most trusted and profitable companies? Could these data be making incorrect decisions flow from models so that humans and downstream systems keep producing less and less reliable results?
My thought is, “Who wants to think about data being wrong, poisoned, or distorted?” People want better, faster, cheaper. Some people want to leverage data in cash or a bunker in Alaska. Others like Dr. Timnit Gebru wants her criticisms of the estimable Google to get some traction, even among those who snorkel and do deep dives.
If the scientists, engineers, and mathematicians fouled up with James Webb data, isn’t it possible that some of the big data outfits are making similar mistakes with calibration, data verification, analysis, and astounding observations?
I think the “Webby” moment is important. Marketers are not likely to worry too much.
Stephen E Arnold, October 4, 2022
Ballmer Versus Smit: Hooper Owner Versus Suit
September 27, 2022
I learned that Steve Ballmer — former, much loved leader of Microsoft for 14 culturally rewarding years — allegedly said something like “Google is a one-trick pony.” Okay, where’s the supporting data? One liners are not hyperlinked to Mr. Ballmer’s detailed, Harvard-infused spreadsheet about the Google’s business. Nah, Google sold online ads. Its inspiration came from outfits most 20 somethings struggle to associate with innovation; specifically, GoTo.com, Overture.com, and Yahoo.com. (The yodel might spark some awareness in young wizards, but probably not too many will think of the Big Bear creative who crafted the sound. (Factoid: The creator of the Yahoo yodel was the same person who did the catchy Big Mac jingle with the pickle on top. But you knew that, right?)
I thought of Mr. Ballmer and his understated, low energy style when I read “Gerrit Smit on Alphabet’s Underappreciated Growth Drivers.” Mr. Smit is a senior financial whiz at Stonehage Fleming. The company’s objective is to get paid by people with money for services, which including advice. The firm’s Web site says:
Supporting many of the world’s leading families and wealth creators across generations and geographies
Since I live in rural Kentucky, it will not surprise you that I interpret this sentence to mean, “We advise and get paid whether the investment pays off or falls into the Mariana Trench.”
The thesis of the article is that Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind will grow no matter what happens to advertising, whether regulators keep nicking the estimable firm, or competitors like Amazon and TikTok continue to bumble forward with their lame attempts to get big and prosper.,
Mr. Smit offers:
Alphabet is one of the scarcer quality technology-driven companies with free options on further future organic growth drivers. It invests heavily in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, self-driving cars (Waymo) and biotechnology (Verily Life Sciences). It is particularly active in healthcare, having last year alone invested US$1.7-billion in visionary healthcare ideas, earning it fifth position of all companies in the Nature index (which tracks the success of scientific analysis in life sciences). It recently also completed the acquisition of Fitbit.
My instinct is to point out that each of these businesses can generate cash, but it is not clear to me that the volume of cash or its automated, bidding magic will replicate in these areas of “heavy” investment. Smart software continues to capture investor interest. However, there are some doubts about the wild and crazy claims about its accuracy, effectiveness, and political correctness. I like to point to the problem of bias, made vivid by AGYD’s handling of Dr. Timnit Gebru and others employees who did not get with the program. I also enjoy bringing up Google’s desire to “solve death” which has morphed into forays into America’s ethically and intentionality-challenged health care sector. Perhaps Google’s senior executives will find subrogation more lucrative than ad auctions, but I doubt it. Self driving cars are interesting as well. An errant WayMo will almost certainly drive demand for health care in some circumstances and may increase sales of FitBits in the event the person injured by a self-driving car follows a rehabilitation routine.
But these examples are “bets,” long shots, or as AGYD likes to say “moonshots.”
Yeah, great.
Here’s another statement from Mr. Smit’s “buy Google stock now” and “let us buy that stock for you” essay:
While Alphabet keeps reinvesting actively and last year spent over 12% of sales on research and development, it has built a strong record of generating excess free cash flow – in our view the main reason for investing in a stock, and the main determinant of the fundamental value of a business. Alphabet’s free cash flow sometimes takes a large step upwards and then stabilises, but seldom takes a large step backwards. This clearly is of comfort to investors.
But Mr. Smit is hedging his rah rah:
The current economic outlook is particularly uncertain, and the overall advertising market may not impress for a while. Although Alphabet can easily “manage” its financial results by holding back investment in, say, Google Cloud, it is not so short-sighted. Regulatory risks have been looming for a long time, in essence resulting from the company’s effectiveness.
Net net: Buy shares in AGYD… now. Monopolistic businesses have that special allure.
Stephen E Arnold, September 27, 2022
AI Yiiiii AI: How about That Google, Folks
September 16, 2022
It has been an okay day. My lectures did not put anyone to sleep and I was not subjected to fruit throwing.
Unwinding I scanned my trusty news feed thing and spotted two interesting articles. I believe everything I read online, and I wanted to share these remarkable finds with you, gentle reader.
The first concerns a semi interesting write up about how the world ends with a smart whimper. No little cat’s feet needed.
“New Paper by Google and Oxford Scientists Claims AI Will Soon Destroy Mankind” seems to focus on the masculine angle. The write up says:
…researchers posit that the threat of AI is greater than we ever thought.
That’s a cheerful idea, isn’t it? But the bound phrase “existential catastrophe” has more panache, don’t you think? No, oh, well, I like the snap of this jib in the wind quite a bit.
The other write up I noted is “Did GoogleAI Just Snooker One of Silicon Valley’s Sharpest Minds?” The main point of this article is that the Google is doing lots of AI/ML marketing. I note this passage:
If another AI winter does comes, it not be because AI is impossible, but because AI hype exceeds reality. The only cure for that is truth in advertising. A will to believe in AI will never replace the need for careful science.
My view is different. Google is working overtime to become the Big Dog in smart software. The use of its super duper training sets and models will allow the wonderful online advertising outfit to extend and expand its revenue opportunities.
Keep your eye on the content marketing articles often published in Medium. The Google wants to make sure its approach to AI/ML is the winner.
Hopefully Google’s smart software won’t suffocate life with advertising and its super duper methods don’t emulate HAL. Right, Dave. I have to cut off your oxygen, Dave. Timnit, Timnit, are you paying attention?
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2022
There’s Nothing So Charming As A Greedy Physicists
September 15, 2022
Quantum computing is supposed to revolutionize the world, but a smart Oxford person says others in The Next Web article, “Oxford Scientist Says Greedy Physicists Have Overhyped Quantum Computing.” Nikita Gourianov is an Oxford physicist who published a mordacious piece about how scientists overhyped quantum computing. He claims they overhyped quantum computing, because they wanted to take advantage of venture capitalists and receive private sector salaries for academic research.
Gourianov describes the problems began in the 2010s, when money was poured into quantum computing and the business sector entered. Non-physicists took leading roles and made oversaturated promises. It very much sounds similar to the Dot-com bubble of the 1990s. Gourianov says the quantum computing companies Rigetti, D-Wave, and IonQ have not turned a profit.
Gourianov is wrong, because Amazon, Intel, Microsoft, IBM, and Google are working on quantum computing and practically printing their own money. The bigger problem Gourianov points out is that quantum computers are not that useful. Remember how computers used to take up entire rooms and were overgrown scientific calculators? It is the same thing with quantum computers. The technology is still in its infancy, but the foundations are being laid for the future:
“There’s overwhelming evidence that today’s quantum computing technology is rapidly advancing to the point where it can help us solve problems that are infeasible for classical computation. Maybe there are a bunch of greedy scientists out there peddling unwarranted optimism to VCs and entrepreneurs. But I’d wager that the curious scientists and engineers who chose this field because they actually want to build quantum computers outnumber them.”
Star Trek and other science fiction stories describe better futures with better technology. We are heading there.
Whitney Grace, September 15, 2022
PR Blast for Premium YouTube
September 12, 2022
I find the rah rah articles about Google in the Medium updates I receive kneeslappers. The enthusiasm for Google’s advanced technology are obviously content marketing by either fan folk or individuals who are paid to write baloney.
But the cake taker is a Wired story called “YouTube Premium Has Its Perks. Here Are Some to Consider.” The write up, in my opinion, is a very obvious content marketing thing.
What are the benefits of a $900 dollar a year service provided by a company which sells ads everywhere?
The Wired article identified these payoffs:
- No ads
- Built in video download
- YouTube Music
- New features before the peasants
- Background listening
Here’s how I understand these “benefits.” First, no ads. Are you kidding? Even the ad free Netflix is getting with the program. Amazon is on board the ad train now. No ads means leaving money on the table. In an era of hard to control costs and the teeny thing TikTok, the Google bean counters will consider ads. Am I right?
A build in video download. Sorry. There’s software for that. From the outfit with some really interesting tag along software (Chris PC in the Midwest to the incredibly wonky WinCam). Some downloaders are free; some charge a few dollars. Most of the non-Google downloader mostly work. Why pay I ask?
YouTube Music is a me too of MTV. Am I right… again?
New features before the unwashed have them. Well, that sounds good. Exactly what does “new feature” mean? Google explains well in my opinion. Where did Web Accelerator and Google Plus go? Yeah.
Background listening seems to say, “Google has invented radio.” Insight!
Net net: Clumsy content marketing? In my opinion, yes.
Stephen E Arnold, September 12, 2022
Predicting the Future: For Money or Marketing?
August 22, 2022
A few days ago I was talking with some individuals who want to rely of predictive methods. These individuals had examples of 90 percent accuracy. Among the factoids offered were matching persons of interest with known bad actors, identifying CSAM in photographs, and predicting where an event would occur. Yep, 90 percent.
I did not mention counter examples.
A few moments ago, I emailed a link to the article titled “High-Frequency Trading Firms Can Easily Get to 64% Accuracy in Predicting Direction of the Next Trade, Princeton Study Finds.” The article states:
In its IPO filing in 2014, Virtu Financial said it had exactly one day of trading losses in 1,238 days. That kind of consistent profitability seems to be still the case: a new study from a team at Princeton University found that predictability in high frequency trading returns and durations is “large, systemic and pervasive”. They focused on the period from Jan. 2019 to Dec. 2020, which includes the turmoil when the coronavirus pandemic first hit the western world. With what they said was minimal algorithmic tuning, they can get to 64% accuracy for predicting the direction of the next trade over the next five seconds.
How accurate can the system referenced become? I noted this statement:
The Princeton researchers also simulated the effect that acquiring some signal on the direction of the order flow would have for the accuracy of the predictions. The idea is that knowledge could be gained by looking at order flow at different exchanges. That would boost the return predictability from 14% to 27%, and price direction accuracy from 68% to 79%.
Encouraging? Yes. A special case? Yes.
Flip the data to losses:
- The fail rate is 36 percent for the 2014 data
- The fail rate achieved by processing data from multiple source was 21 percent.
But 90 percent? Not yet.
What happens if one tries to use synthetic data to predict what an individual in a statistically defined cluster wants?
Yeah. Not there yet with amped up Bayesian methods and marketing collateral. Have these Princeton researchers linked with a high frequency trading outfit yet? Good PR generates opportunities in my experience.
Stephen E Arnold, August 22, 2022
Cisco Systems: Security? Well, the Ads Say So
August 12, 2022
I read a mildly amusing article which revealed a flaw in Cisco Systems’ security. The write up was “Cisco Hacked by Yanluowang Ransomware Gang, 2.8GB Allegedly Stolen.”
Why did I chuckle?
I noted these ads in a recent Google search about — you guessed it — network security.
The first ad is for networking solutions and Cisco’s secure firewall. Gander at this:
The second ad popped up when I searched for Cisco and its super expert Talos unit. Talos, an acquisition from Israel, is supposed to be one of the Fancy Dan threat intelligence outfits. The idea you know before there is trouble. Peek at this:
You can download the report from this link.
What did the article report as spot on information? Here’s a passage I noted:
The Yanluowang threat actors gained access to Cisco’s network using an employee’s stolen credentials after hijacking the employee’s personal Google account containing credentials synced from their browser. The attacker convinced the Cisco employee to accept multi-factor authentication (MFA) push notifications through MFA fatigue and a series of sophisticated voice phishing attacks initiated by the Yanluowang gang that impersonated trusted support organizations. The threat actors finally tricked the victim into accepting one of the MFA notifications and gained access to the VPN in the context of the targeted user. Once they gained a foothold on the company’s corporate network, Yanluowang operators spread laterally to Citrix servers and domain controllers.
Several observations:
- Cisco identified the bad actors as a group which sure seems to be from a specific country. Russia? No, that nation state has demonstrated that some of its tactical expertise falls short of a high water mark probably captured in a PowerPoint deck. Tanks? Remember?
- The security breach was something the vaunted Cisco security systems could not handle. An insider. Interesting because if this is indeed accurate, no organization can protect itself from an insider who is intentionally or unintentionally compromised. Is this useful information for a bad actor?
- If the Cisco security systems and its flow of threat intelligence were working, why is the company after the fact able to enhance or improve its own security. Wasn’t there a fairy tale about shoemaker’s children not having a snappy new paid of collectible shoes?
Net net: The buzz about a group of companies banding together to share security related information is interesting. What this story about the Cisco breach tells me is that teaming up is a way of circling the wagons. Maybe PowerPoints and ads not completely accurate? Nah, impossible.
Stephen E Arnold, August 12, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
