Palantir and the US Army: Procurement Thrills

July 6, 2016

I read “Palantir Takes Fight with Army to Federal Court.” The write up is quite useful because the reporter Jen Judson was able to glean some information from a document related to the Palantir versus US Army matter. When I looked for the document, it seemed to me that the complaint had been sealed. I learned from the article:

Palantir is arguing the way the Army wrote its requirements in a request for proposals to industry would shut out Silicon Valley companies that provide commercially available products. The company contended that the Army’s plan to award just one contract to a lead systems integrator means commercially available solutions would have to be excluded.

The Defense News story included some interesting factoids. Here are three I noted:

  • Palantir perceives the US Army acting in what is described as an “irrational” way.
  • The program for a database, analytics, and visualization tools has consumed billions of dollars and is a development project, not a commercial off the shelf deal.
  • Some Army personnel requested Palantir’s software and found the request denied.

Let’s assume that the Army is trying to build a solution which delivers what Palantir Gotham offers as ready-to-roll system listed on the GSA schedule like photocopying machines.

The questions that rose from my addled goose brain were:

  1. Why is the Army reluctant to use commercial-off-the-shelf software? My narrow experience with government procurement suggests that there is some other factor or factors making the coding of a system from ground zero or cranking out scripts to hook existing systems together more attractive than buying something that pretty much works.
  2. Why is Palantir unable to play procurement ball with the other major defense contracting companies? Is there a trust issue in play? Palantir was caught in a sticky wicket with i2 Group over the Analyst’s Notebook file format. As a former adviser to i2 before it became part of IBM, I know that the file format was a bit of information Mike Hunter and his colleagues treated as a close hold.
  3. What issues do the major vendors involved in the Army’s program have with Palantir’s business methods? Most government centric vendors generally get along and take a live-and-let-live approach to big projects. If vendors are not willing to play in the same sandbox, some bad vibes exist for some reason.

Unfortunately I don’t have answers to these questions. My view is that tackling the US Army and procurement methods is likely to cause some consternation for folks involved in the statement of work, the procurement, and the legal machinations.

Plus, the procurement guidelines and the actual procurement processes are often complex and somewhat flexible. As a result, when a commercial company lets the legal eagles fly, the US government has some wiggle room.

Finally, this Palantir versus the Army strikes me as a reprise of Google’s grousing about its not winning the search project for the original version of USA.gov. Big Silicon Valley companies make assumptions. For example, Google tossed around the term rational and the word logical as I recall. The problem is that trust, fear, and revenue may not fit into a Venn diagram or a numerical recipe.

Will Silicon Valley triumph over the so called Beltway Bandits? Will Silicon Valley rationality emerge victorious in the joust with the Army? Stay tuned for the outcome unless the resolution is sealed just like the ANB file format once was.

Stephen E Arnold, July 6, 2016

Palantir Technologies: A Valuation Factoid

July 5, 2016

I read “Palantir Buyback Plan Shows Need for New Silicon Valley Pay System.” (You may have to view this write up. Don’t email me. I don’t think about “real” journalists.) Tucked into the somewhat humorous write up was a factoid. I want to capture it because “real” reporters and “real” information can be tough to track down using an online search system.

Here’s the factoid:

It [Palantir] is offering $7.40 a share to buy back up to 12.5 percent of an employee’s shares…Morgan Stanley recently marked down the value of Palantir’s shares to $5.92.

That $1.48 just hangs there. Too bad the write up did not answer this question:

What were the valuations Morgan Stanley assigned when Palantir Technologies had a valuation of $20 billion. I assume that rainbows, unicorns, and other “real” artifacts, one must assume that Palantir is zipping right along the information superhighway.

Stephen E Arnold, July 5, 2016

More Palantir Spotting

June 27, 2016

Trainspotting is a collection of short stories or a novel presented as a series of short stories by Irvine Welsh. The fun lovers in the fiction embrace avocations which seem to be addictive. The thrill is the thing. Now I think I have identified Palantir spotting.

Navigate to “Palantir Seeks to Muzzle Former Employees.” I am not too interested in the allegations in the write up. What is interesting is that the article is one of what appears to be of series of stories about Palantir Technologies enriched with non public documents.

image

The Thingverse muzzle might be just the ticket for employees who want to chatter about proprietary information. I assume the muzzle is sanitary and durable, comes in various sizes, and adapts to the jaw movement of the lucky dog wearing the gizmo.

Why use the phrase “Palantir spotting.” It seems to me that making an outfit which provides services and software to government entities is an unusual hobby. I, for example, lecture about the Dark Web, how to recognize recycled analytics algorithms and their assorted “foibles,” and how to find information in the new, super helpful Google Web search system.

Poking the innards of an outfit with interesting software and some wizards who might be a bit testy is okay if done with some Onion type  or Colbert like humor. Doing what one of my old employers did in the 1970s to help ensure that company policies remain inside the company is old hat to me.

In the write up, I noted:

The Silicon Valley data-analysis company, which recently said it would buy up to $225 million of its own common stock from current and former staff, has attached some serious strings to the offer. It is requiring former employees who want to sell their shares to renew their non-disclosure agreements, agree not to poach Palantir employees for 12 months, and promise not to sue the company or its executives, a confidential contract reviewed by BuzzFeed News shows. The terms also dictate how former staff can talk to the press. If they get any inquiries about Palantir from reporters, the contract says, they must immediately notify Palantir and then email the company a copy of the inquiry within three business days. These provisions, which haven’t previously been reported, show one way Palantir stands to benefit from the stock purchase offer, known as a “liquidity event.”

Okay, manage information flow. In my experience, money often comes with some caveats. At one time I had lots and lots of @Home goodies which disappeared in a Sillycon Valley minute. The fine print for the deal covered the disappearance. Sigh. That’s life with techno-financial wizards. It seems life has not changed too much since the @Home affair decades ago.

I expect that there will be more Palantir centric stories. I will try to note these when they hit my steam powered radar detector in Harrod’s Creek. My thought is that like the protagonists in Trainspotting, Palantir spotting might have some after effects.

I keep asking myself this question:

How do company confidential documents escape the gravitational field of a comparatively secretive company?

The Palantir spotters are great data gatherers or those with access to the documents are making the material available. No answers yet. Just that question about “how”.

Stephen E Arnold, June 27, 2016

Palantir Technologies: Now Beer Pong and Human Augmented Intelligence?

June 23, 2016

I went months, nay years, without reading very much about Palantir Technologies. Now the unicorn seems to be prancing through my newsfeeds frequently. I read “Palantir’s Party Culture: Beer Pong, Office Pranks, and a Bad Case of the Hives.” The focus is less on how Gotham works and the nifty data management system the firm has engineered and more upon revelations about life inside a stealthy vendor of search and content processing systems.

The write up uses what appears to be company emails  and letters from attorneys as sources of information. I thought that emails were the type of information not widely available. Lawyer letters? Hmm. Guess not. A former Hobbit (allegedly the Palantirians’ names for themselves in the Shire) has revealed information about a matter involving a terminated employee.

The Sillycon Valley company allegedly has or had employees who horsed around. I find this difficult to believe. Fun at work? Wow. The aggrieved individual alleges he was injured by a “drunk coworker” who was playing beer pong. And the individual with a beef allegedly had “snacks” taken from his work space. (I thought Palantir-type outfits provided food for the Hobbit-like individuals.)

The write up contains this statement:

The letter [from a legal eagle?] also makes the surprising allegation that Palantir engaged in improper business practices by using both Bloomberg data feeds and software from an IT firm called ANB without the appropriate licenses. Neither Palantir, Bloomberg, nor ANB responded to requests for comment. In the July 2010 letter, Cohen’s attorney states that his client was retaliated against for speaking out about these practices. From the letter:

Mr Cohen was retaliated against for…complaining about issues such as Palantir’s illegal use of third party copyrighted and trademarked icons and Bloomberg data feeds without adequate licenses. In addition, Mr. Cohen was retaliated against for complaining about the illegal use of open source code without crediting authors, and the illegal use of ANB software development kit without ANB’s authorization.

Yikes. From beer pong and missing snacks to the allegation of “improper business practices.”  Who knew this was possible?

Please, note that the statements in the write up about “ANB” probably refer to IBM i2’s proprietary file structures for the Analyst’s Notebook product. (I dug in that outfit’s garden for a while.) What other errors lurk within these write ups about disenchanted Hobbits?

Several questions occurred to me:

  1. Is Palantir’s email system insecure? Have there been other caches of company email let loose from the Shire?
  2. Are these emails publicly available? Will those with access to the emails gather them and post them on a pastesite?
  3. What is the relationship between the IBM i2 proprietary file format and the Gotham system? (Wasn’t there a legal dust up with regard to i2’s proprietary technology?)
  4. How do commercial database content feeds find their way into systems not licensed for such access?

I find it interesting how a company which purports to maintain a low profile captures the attention of “real” journalists who have access to emails and legal letters.

I noted a couple of factoids too:

Key factoid one: Beer pong can be dangerous.

Key factoid two: People working in high tech outfits may want to check out their internal governance methods. Emails don’t walk; emails get sent or copied before, during, or after beer pong.

Stephen E Arnold, June 23, 2016

Palantir Technologies Challenges US Government Procurement

June 22, 2016

I was a wee lad when I read Don Quixote. I know that students in Spain and some other countries study the text of the 17th century novel closely. I did not. I remember flipping through a Classics’ comic book, reading the chapter summaries in Cliff’s Notes, and looking at the pictures in the edition in my high school’s library. Close enough for horse shoes. (I got an A on the test. Heh heh heh.)

Here’s what I recall the Don and his sidekick. A cultured fellow read a lot of fantasy fiction, mixed it up the real world, and went off on adventures or sallies. The protagonist (see I remember something from Ms. Sperling’s literature class in 1960) rode a horse and charged into the countryside to kill windmills. I remember there were lots and lots of adventures, not too much sex – drugs – rock and roll, and many convoluted literary tropes.

I still like the windmills. A Google search showed me an image which is very similar to the one in the comic book I used as my definitive version of the great novel. Here it is:

Image result for don quixote windmills

What does a guy riding a horse with a lance toward a windmill have to do with search and content processing? Well, I read “Palantir Lambastes Army Over $206 Million Contract Bidding.” I assume the information in the write up is spot on.

Palantir Technologies, a unicorn which is the current fixation of a Buzzfeed journalist, is going to sue the US Army over a “to be” contract for work. The issue is an all source information system procurement known as DCGS or sometimes DI2E. The acronyms are irrelevant. What is important is that the US Army has been plugging away with a cadre of established government contractors for a decade. Depending on whom one asks, DCGS is the greatest thing since sliced bread or it is a flop.

However, Palantir believes that its augmented intelligence system is a better DCGS / DI2E. than the actual DCGS / DI2E.

The US Army may not agree and appears be on the path to awarding the contract for DCGS work to other vendors.

According to the write up:

Palantir claims the Army’s solicitation is “unlawful, irrational, arbitrary and capricious,” according to the letter of intent Palantir sent to the U.S. Army and the Department of Justice, which was obtained by Bloomberg. The letter is a legal courtesy, which states Palantir will file a formal protest in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims next week and requests the Army delay awarding the first phase of the contract until litigation is resolved. The contract is slated to be awarded by the end of 2016.

The contract is worth a couple of hundred million, but the follow on work is likely to hit nine figures. Palantir has some investors who want more growth. The best way to get it, if the write up is accurate, is on the backs of legal eagles.

I don’t know anything about the US Army and next to nothing about Palantir, but I have some experience watching vendors protest the US government’s procurement process. My thought is that when bidders sue the government:

  • Costs go up. Lawyers are very busy, often for a year or more. In lawyer land, billing is really good.
  • Delays occur. The government unit snagged in the contracting hassle have to juggle more balls; for example, tasks have to be completed. When the vendors are not able to begin work, delays occur. This may not be a problem in lawyer land, but in the real world, downstream dependencies can be a hitch in the git along.
  • Old scores may be hummed. Palantir settled a legal dust up with IBM which owns i2 Analysts Notebook. The Analysts Notebook is the very same software system whose file structure Palantir wanted to understand. i2 was not too keen on making its details available. (Note: I was a consultant to i2 for a number of years, and this was input number one to me from one of the founders). IBM has a pretty good institutional memory without consulting Watson.)

And Don Quixote? I wonder if the Palantirians, some of whom fancy themselves Hobbits, are going to be able to shape the real world to their vision. The trajectory of this legal dust up will be interesting to watch as it flames across the sky toward Spain and Don Quixote’s fictional library. Flame out or direct hit? The US Army and US government procurement policies are able to absorb charging horses and possibly a lance poke or two.

Stephen E Arnold, June 22, 2016

Palantir Technologies: Maybe the US Army Should Be Skeptical?

June 20, 2016

I read “How Hired Hackers Got “Complete Control” Of Palantir.” On one hand, Palantir surfed on secrecy as its Hyptokrypto for marketing. The idea that Palantir’s internal network would become a party wave was not part of the 2003-2004 plan. The write up is by a Sillycon Valley observer who may not be invited to a Palantir algorithms meet up.

I am confident that the write up is spot on. If it is not accurate, my hunch is that the Gotham crowd may emulate the feistiness of one of the Palantir founders. Think Hulk Hogan and the estimable publication Gawker.

I noted this passage:

the cybersecurity firm Veris Group concluded that even a low-level breach would allow hackers to gain wide-ranging and privileged access to the Palantir network, likely leading to the “compromise of critical systems and sensitive data, including customer-specific information.”

I circled this statement in true blue:

Their presence [the penetration testers] was finally discovered, the report says, after they broke into the laptops of information security employees — but even then, the intruders were able to monitor the employees’ countermoves in real time, shifting tactics to evade them.

A Hobbit is quoted as saying:

“The findings from the October 2015 report are old and have long since been resolved,” Lisa Gordon, a Palantir spokesperson, said in an emailed statement. “Our systems and our customers’ information were never at risk. As part of our best practices, we conduct regular reviews and tests of our systems, like every other technology company does.”

Gnarly. Palantir seems to have hired a penetration testing outfit. Somehow the report leaked. Secure outfits often try to limit leaks.

Stephen E Arnold, June 20, 2016

Palantir Technology Takes on Rogue Traders

June 9, 2016

Rogue trading has always been a problem for the stock market, but the more technology advances the easier it becomes for rogue traders to take advantage.  The good news is that security and compliance officers can use the same tools that rogue traders use in their schemes to stop them.  CNBC showed the story; “Tech Takes On Rogue Traders” that explains how technology is being used to stop the bad guys.   The report is described as:

“Colleen Graham, Chief Supervisory Officer at Signac, discusses Palantir and Credit Suisse’s joint technology initiative to crack down on rogue traders.”

Palantir Technology is being used along with Credit Suisse to monitor trader behavior data trade data, risk data, and market data to monitor how a trader changes over time.  They compare individual trader to others invested in similar stocks.  Using a combination of all these data fields, unusual behavior is monitored to prevent rogue trading.

The biggest loss on Wall Street is rogue trading.  The data Signac gathers helps figure out how rogue trading happens and what causes it.  By using analytical software, compliance officers are able to learn from past crimes and teach the software to recognize similar patterns.  In turn, this allows them to prevent future crimes. While some false positives are generated, all of the captured data is public.  Supervisors and other people actually are supposed to read this data; Signac just does so at a more in-depth level.

Catching rogue traders helps keep Wall Street running smoother and even puts the stockbrokers and other financial force back to work.

Palantir scored a new deal from this venture.  The same technology used to monitor the Dark Web is used to capture rogue traders.

Whitney Grace, June 9, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Palantir Technologies: Will the Company Prevail in DCGS?

June 3, 2016

I read “Army Eyes DCGS Reforms on Capitol Hill.” Not long ago, I described a decision which struck me as putting Palantir in a checkmate position. This write up explains that Palantir does have a deus ex machina to help it prevail in its DCGS travails. You can review my earlier write up and the GAO’s decision in “GAO DCGS Letter B-412746.”

If the “Army Eyes DCGS Reform” write up is spot on, there is some procurement excitement ahead. Those activities will not be in the “FAR” future. (FAR is a US government acronym for a collection of procurement guidelines.)

I learned:

Palantir is considering suing the Army over the DCGS-A 2 solicitation, according to a Politico report. The Army has said it expects to award a $206 million contract for DCGS-A 2 later this year.

Here’s the snippet I located of the “report”:

image

Politico said:

“The secretive Silicon Valley firm Palantir is considering suing the Army to block a planned $206 million contract to build a next-generation battlefield intelligence network, an industry lobbyist with knowledge of the issue told POLITICO. It’s the latest sign that commercial technology companies are becoming increasingly aggressive in seeking to wrestle big-dollar contracts from the Pentagon’s traditional suppliers.

How much money is at stake? Think in terms of $2.5 to $3.5 billion over the new two or three years. That’s without scope changes and the impedimenta government contracts entail. (If you are curious, you can find the RFP summary at this link.)

How does a commercial company go about derailing the Department of Defense. I used to work at an outfit which provided to President Theodore Roosevelt an advisor. That advisor helped design the Department of Navy. Think it is easy dislodging my former employer from its government contracts?

This is not Monty Hall time. Palantir Technologies has an opportunity to disrupt US government procurement procedures. Can the Hobbits prevail? I know that Tolkien fiction works out in fantasy worlds, but the procurement process might be a bridge too FAR.

If you want to read the regulations, start here.

Stephen E Arnold, June 3, 2016

From My Palantir Archive: Security

May 27, 2016

I was curious about my notes about Palantir and its security capabilities. I have some digital and paper files. I print out some items and tuck them in a folder labeled “Hobbits.” In my Hobbit folder was:

Q.&A.: Guarding Personal Data From Abuse by Insiders, October 14, 2015

You may be able to locate a copy of this story by searching the New York Times or by going to your local library and using its OPAC. If that doesn’t work, you may have to delve into the flagging world of commercial databases.

In the write up, I noticed that I had circled in tell-the-truth blue this passage:

For privacy, the main worry may not be hackers as much as bad actions by authorized users. A useful concept in information system architecture is accountability oversight. Flagging people who misuse things. Revealing private things only by degree. Having access controls.

I thought of this because Buzzfeed has published a couple of write ups based on Palantir’s own information. Presumably the information could not have come from insiders because Palantir’s own security professional referenced the firm’s auditing capability.

The idea, as I understand it, is that one can use Palantir’s logs to “walk back the cat” and identify a person or persons who might have taken an action to reveal company information.

I also circled:

When a data breach is exposed, it’s a discrete event. You know what will happen, for the most part. Marketing is directed at a lifestyle.

Yeah, but Buzzfeed has published two articles and both struck me as deriving factoids from different sources.

With Socom embracing Palantir for maybe three years, my question is, “Does Palantir have safeguards in place which will make a third Buzzfeed type article a low probability or 0.000001 event?

Yikes, two articles based on what may be leaked internal information. What happens if sensitive military information goes walkabout?

I assume there is no such thing as a Hobbit alert? I need to read The Architecture of Privacy, an O’Reilly book written by Palantirians or Hobbits. I hope this is not a do-as-I-say, not a do-as-I-do thing.

Stephen E Arnold, May 27, 2016

Palantir: Information Leaks from Secret Outfit?

May 24, 2016

I read “Palantir To Buy Up To $225 Million Of Stock From Employees.” I am not too interested in a company trying to provide cash to workers who have to buy food in Sillycon Valley. The main point of the write up from my vantage point in wide open Harrod’s Creek is that the source of the information is a memo. I assume that outfits providing certain government agencies with services some are not supposed to know about or talk about are water tight.

Guess not.

Here’s the passage I highlighted in “loose lips sink ships” red:

The so-called “liquidity event” will be held at a price of $7.40 per share, Palantir said in a memo to staff that was obtained by BuzzFeed News.

Yo, dudes, passive voice. How? Some color, please. Also, who exactly is leaking or hacking what? Was this an encrypted message, a clear text message on a password protected system? Was the message sent using a special “channel”, available to some government contractors.

Several questions fluttered through my mind this fine May morning:

  1. What is Palantir doing which allows memos to find their way into the outside world?
  2. What about the security for some of the projects which Palantir pursues for certain government agencies?
  3. If Palantir itself is leaking information into Sillycon Valley channels, what’s up with the firm’s management?
  4. Is governance an issue at Palantir post i2 and post HBGary?

I have a compendium of 100 pages of Palantir information I have compiled from open sources. I cannot recall an internal document in my collection of research. I may offer this round up of Palantirist factoids and opinion in a for fee Cliff’s Notes-type of PDF. Want a copy? Write benkent2020@yahoo.com, please.

What’s changed at Palantir Technologies, home of the Hobbits, keeper of the seeing stone. Perhaps the seeing stone cannot perceive security issues as well as some assert. The situation reminds me of my comments to the Google about the flow of information about its projects which found its way into open source channels. The Googler with whom I spoke seemed indifferent to the issue. I concluded, “Hey, that stuff does not happen to Google.”

Right.

Stephen E Arnold, May 24, 2016

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta