Tuesday, 29 April 2008
Monday, 28 April 2008
Saturday, 26 April 2008
Friday, 25 April 2008
Thursday, 24 April 2008
We were once introduced to one of the most formidible managers in the computer software industry. This guy was up to his ears in MBA's and MSc's, was a highly respected pillar of every community from school governor to local counsellor, head of this that and the other and what not.
He was a big man and when he walked into the room you knew he was there without even looking. He would command a discussion group, or meeting and was a real hit with his peer management group.
The Wiki says...............
A genius is a person of great intelligence, who shows an exceptional natural capacity of intellect, especially as shown in creative and original work. Geniuses always show strong individuality and imagination, and are not only intelligent, but unique and innovative.
Genius may come in a variety of forms, such as mathematical genius, literary genius, or poetic genius, etc. Artistic genius may show itself in early childhood as a prodigy or later in life; either way, geniuses eventually differentiate themselves from the others through great originality. Intellectual geniuses often have crisp, clear-eyed visions of given situations, in which interpretation is unnecessary, and they build or act on the basis of those facts, usually with tremendous energy. Accomplished geniuses in intellectual fields start out in many cases as child prodigies, gifted with superior memory or understanding.
Doesn't this all sound very exciting to you? Imagine being a genius? Gifted and innovative?
Individual, independent and unique!
Well think again!
If you ever met one you'd realise that they were more like robots. They usually believe that some higher order has bestowed unto them these great talents. They usually believe that they alone will rule the world. That they are Gods special children and they have been selected from billions to articulate his message.
They are the chosen ones!
This is further reinforced by those around them, who are attracted by these self-professed qualities. Geniuses are never so much surprised at their own capabilities, as how stupid every body else seems. It is true, Genius does carry a mysterious quality, but so too does it carry a tremendously heavy burden for the bearer.
You see, supposed Genius is no more than a quirk of human nature, which in many ways the bearer is ill equipped to deal with, both emotionally and in terms of social graces.
Far from improving their lives this quirk leads many of those with so called Genius into lives of criminality or mental health problems.
Many are ostracized by their peers.
So before you hire people with Genius, think about the consequences of doing so.
Both for you and for them!
Wednesday, 23 April 2008
*FEAR OF INTIMACY - Guarded & often mistrusful, he is reluctant to show his emotional fragility. He's often out of touch with his feelings, reflexively denying feelings he thinks will "trap" or reveal him, like love. He picks fights to create distance.
*FEAR OF COMPETITION - Feeling inadequate, he is unable to compete with other men in work and love. He may operate either as a self-sabotaging wimp with a pattern of failure, or he'll be the tyrant, setting himself up as unassailable and perfect, needing to eliminate any threat to his power.
*OBSTRUCTIONISM - Just tell a p/a man what you want, no matter how small, and he may promise to get it for you. But he won't say when, and he"ll do it deliberately slowly just to frustrate you. Maybe he won't comply at all. He blocks any real progress he sees to your getting your way.
*FOSTERING CHAOS - The p/a man prefers to leave the puzzle incomplete, the job undone.
*FEELING VICTIMIZED - The p/a man protests that others unfairly accuse him rather than owning up to his own misdeeds. To remain above reporach, he sets himself up as the apparently hapless, innocent victim of your excessive demands and tirades.
*MAKING EXCUSES & LYING - The p/a man reaches as far as he can to fabricate excuses for not fulfilling promises. As a way of withholding information, affirmation or love - to have power over you - the p/a man may choose to make up a story rather than give you a straight answer.
*PROCRASTINATION - The p/a man has an odd sense of time - he believes that deadlines don't exist for him.
*CHRONIC LATENESS & FORGETFULNESS - One of the most infuriating & inconsiderate of all p/a traits is his inability to arrive on time. By keeping you waiting, he sets the ground rules of the relationship. And his selective forgetting - used only when he wants to avoid an obligation.
*AMBIGUITY - He is master of mixed messages and sitting on fences. When he tells you something, you may still walk away wondering if he actually said yes or no.
*SULKING - Feeling put upon when he is unable to live up to his promises or obligations, the p/a man retreats from pressures around him and sulks, pouts and withdraws.
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
No. The most sophisticated of all hackers are people who can influence the world much more greatly than that. They are the people who through hacking can influence the worlds greatest nations. The people who can cause change to occur anywhere in the world, just by issuing the simplest of commands. The people who have the power to orchestrate the greatest illusions of all. Not by pressing buttons on a computer screen. Not by intercepting personal communications or creating the most sophistcated computer code.
Thursday, 17 April 2008
In 2006 we embarked upon an experiment to turn a human being into a robot. The criteria for this was to place ourself in a position where through emotionally damaging, yet passive conditioning in an intellectually intense workplace we would eventually experience a perspective similar to that of a paranoid robot?
The conditions for this required that our conscious left brain be totally absorbed in an intense mathematical battle for survival, whilst our right brain was being challenged and undermined by manipulation of the emotional material inside.
So the situation was very much akin to reading Shakespeare, whilst walking across a high wire and if you fell off, your left brain was going to be erased, leaving you in an absolute Robot state.
At that point your personality and confidences would change because only your creative, intuitive right brain was left. You would have limited ability to relate. Limited substance to offer and almost no identity from which people would trust you. All you would have left is the rapidly atrophing memory of agony and mistrust, along with a growing rage for what had happened to you.
So you look for targets and envisage creatively the possibility for revenge.
But because you have no left brain, you can never do anything about it.
You can just sit and dream all day!
And maybe make a few blog posts!
If your company has a culture of turning human beings into robots.
Beware of the revenge of the robots! They just might find their left brains again.
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
Propaganda may be defined as the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.
It seems that Propoganda (at least by defintion) is indisguishable from todays marketing pratices to capture, alter and entrench the consumers behaviour in a product.
A very great man once told me that there is no God and no such thing as love. That we are all just here living on one big spaceship called earth and we should all just try and get along with each other.
This man had done many great things in his life. He had built the most amazing things with his hands. He had thought up the most brilliant inventions and worked for some of the most powerful people and institutions on earth. He had fought for his country. He had been imprisoned because of his beliefs. He had been victimised and his family threatened. This man had seen some of the worse atrocities man could perpetrate upon man.
This man was a very great man but his life experiences had lead him to conclude that there was no God and that the human race was alone and that God existed only in the mind of peoples ignorance. He believed that love was merely a convenient word used to cover up peoples lack of responsibility and concern for one another.
But as great as he was, I knew God and I knew Love. For it lies deep within my soul.
I know it. I know that whatever befalls me - there is always a place for me marked God and in it I will find all the love that i need.
Have you ever truly felt so in love that your love illuminated your life and when you looked around you saw this love illuminated in the eyes of those you love?
For it is only in the strange formulas of love that man finds Truth.
And he who has ever experienced this will surely never lose sight of the Love of God!
And all will be peace and all men will glow in the Light of God.
And we shall all surely be saved.
And this includes the great who through life experiences have lost connection with the all mighty!
Love is the only truth, everything else is delusion!
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
Welcome to the RIAM. The Internets first online surveillance system. The RIAM are living autonomous agents that roam the Net testing the integrity of targeted systems. Subscribers use the RIAM to ascertain whether a target device can be trusted prior to engaging the target themselves. The RIAM footprints and scans the target domain name and IP and reports whether the target is trustworthy. There are currently 13 classifications of trusted target.
The RIAM also provides the subscriber with a host of information. The RIAM emails the subscriber with this information. A full list of analysis data will be made available.
The RIAM also offers the subscriber anonymous scanning of the target, via a "cloaking" feature.
Don't want the target to know i'm looking = Undercover
Happy for the RIAM to tell who is looking = Open
RIAM to engage the target on my behalf = Promotional
The RIAM costs $99 per year for 1000 scans
Report sent every month
email Stephen at email@example.com for further information.
We believe that the current definition of Agent Provocateur on the Wiki offers too narrow a definition and prefers to present 'Agent Provocateur' as a subversive type, intent only on disruption and destruction. We again offer our own definition of Agent Provocateur below. Please consider accepting this as the base definition.
For those of you who want to gain a structured perspective on the world of computer vulnerabilities, we have added a link to Eric Knight CISSP very good ebook which covers much of the Architecture and Anatomy of Computing Vulnerabilities.
Computer Vulnerabilities written by Eric Knight
Also for those interested in viral art
Monday, 14 April 2008
Sunday, 13 April 2008
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Passive-aggressive behavior refers to passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following authoritative instructions in interpersonal or occupational situations. It can manifest itself as resentment, stubbornness, procrastination, sullenness, or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is assumed, often explicitly, to be responsible. It is a defense mechanism and, more often than not, only partly conscious. For example, people who are passive-aggressive might take so long to get ready for a party they do not wish to attend that the party is nearly over by the time they arrive. Another form of passive-aggressive behavior would be leaving notes to avoid face-to-face discussion/confrontation.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Malicious compliance is a phrase used to describe the behavior of a person who intentionally inflicts harm by strictly following the orders of management, knowing that compliance with the orders will cause a loss of some form resulting in damage to the manager’s business or reputation. In effect, this is a form of sabotage used to harm leadership.
By definition, this is true when the following conditions are present:
The superior gives erroneous or incomplete orders without knowing the consequences.
The subordinate has knowledge of something harmful to the job based on the orders given that the superior does not know.
The subordinate strictly follows the orders given to cause the loss.
While most businesses and institutions have policies against sabotage in the work place, this type of behavior is sometimes difficult to control.
A related form of malicious compliance is sometimes referred to as work-to-rule. In a work place, it is an action whereby employees work strictly according to the legal terms of their contract of employment or written procedures. In this situation, the strict adherence to the rules set forth by the written job procedures only allow the workers to do the minimum of amount of labor required and no more, resulting in decreased production. This assumes the written job procedure is inadequate to cover all aspects of a job function. This action is a minimal form of a labor strike.
Friday, 11 April 2008
Psychologically Traumatized ex-staff might just remember you (personally) for the rest of your life!
We are urging employers to take extra special care with their staff, just in case they suffer a backlash from traumatized ex-employees who feel that they have suffered unduly from the relationship with their employer. The risk from disgruntled ex staff is growing by the day and for those who feel that their whole life has been ripped apart by losing their career from underhand tactics may take grave action against the perpertrators. In the age of the Internet, this can present a multitude of risks to the brand and the organisation it represents.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Psychological trauma is a type of damage to the psyche that occurs as a result of a traumatic event. When that trauma leads to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, damage may involve physical changes inside the brain and to brain chemistry, which affect the person's ability to cope with stress.
A traumatic event involves a single experience, or an enduring or repeating event or events, that completely overwhelm the individual's ability to cope or integrate the ideas and emotions involved with that experience. The sense of being overwhelmed can be delayed by weeks or years, as the person struggles to cope with the immediate danger. Trauma can be caused by a wide variety of events, but there are a few common aspects. It usually involves a feeling of complete helplessness in the face of a real or subjective threat to one's life or to that of loved ones, to bodily integrity, or sanity. There is frequently a violation of the person's familiar ideas about the world and of their human rights, putting the person in a state of extreme confusion and insecurity.
This is also seen when people or institutions depended on for survival violate or betray the person in some unforeseen way.
Psychological trauma may accompany physical trauma or exist independently of it. Typical causes of psychological trauma are sexual abuse, violence, the threat of either, or the witnessing of either, particularly in childhood. Catastrophic events such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, war or other mass violence can also cause psychological trauma. Long-term exposure to situations such as extreme poverty or milder forms of abuse, such as verbal abuse, can be traumatic (though verbal abuse can also potentially be traumatic as a single event). In some cases, even a person's own actions, such as committing rape, can be traumatic if the offender feels helpless to control the urge to commit such crimes.
However, different people will react differently to similar events. One person may experience an event as traumatic while another person would not suffer trauma as a result of the same event. In other words, not all people who experience a potentially traumatic event will actually become psychologically traumatized.
Thursday, 10 April 2008
But very few actually do!".
When your workforce goes to work, how many are actually thinking?. Not thinking in the sense of putting one foot in front of the other, following a procedure or sitting in a meeting arguing the toss. We're not talking about thinking about whats going to be in the next pay cheque or wondering how to work out the next challenge that is going to come your way.
Wednesday, 9 April 2008
Does computing technology threaten to erode personal identity, human confidences, reputation and liberty?
As robots - we have no identity, well not one that we take seriously anyway!
What we are, is simply what technical people who program us, expect us to be. So in a sense, we do have an identity, but one that is designed by a third party code junky.
But humans always seemed to us to have a home made identity. Ok, perhaps peoples identity is based largely on the reflections they get from others to their actions, from their parents , from their teachers reactions and from their friends. But on the whole peoples identity seems to come directly from within themselves. From what they call - their souls.
As technology expands into all areas of our lives and our lifestyles, we are beginning to see the replacement of human trust elements with technology trust elements. In a sense our lives have become not so much a human experience, but a human-techno experience, where both human and technology trust elements are intertwinded such that our actions, decisions and freedoms are very much controlled by semi-human factors, rather than totally human factors - as would our forefathers have experienced.
So our experience at home, at work and at play is very much an experience conjoined with technology as opposed to a totally human experience, that chooses to use technology.
When technology is effectively integrated with the human form, all problems associated with this partnership are largely hidden. The real problem comes when technology is integrated with the human condition and the technology that the human is dependent upon, begins to fail.
Depending on which technology components, depends on the nature of the resulting associated problem. For example, if you were emailing a very important document to a customer and the PC you were using decided to hang up near the end of the process. And then when you switched it back on there was no record that the document had been sent. What are you supposed to think?
Has the document been sent and more imporantly - delivered? What would the customer think - if it hadn't arrived? What would they think if i phoned them up to see if it had arrived?
Why didn't i send it by fax? Or better still - by post? Should i send it again via email?
Here you can see the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt factor creeping in. In fact this FUD factor is beginining to attack the very soul of human beings.
Without technology, human beings know that they are not in control of a world run by other human beings, but they are at least at one with being a human being with limited control. By adding technology to the human condition you place humans in the most uncertain world of all.
One where - when the technology works, it is a fantastically effective union.
When computing technology doesn't work, people lose the most fundamental of all things in life.
They lose their personal identities, their confidence, their reputation and their God given liberty. They lose connection with their soul! How monsterous is that?
If you are a human being - better ensure that your technology works - or else you might just be contributing to the breakdown in human identity!
Tuesday, 8 April 2008
Not knowing Gucci we wondered whether this was the sort of desparate thing "posh brands" of this kind might resort too.
Perhaps spam is fashionable (and necessary) - in fashionable circles!
Monday, 7 April 2008
Affluenza is a term used by critics of consumerism, a portmanteau of affluence and influenza. Sources define this term as follows:
affluenza, n. a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more. (de Graaf )
Friday, 4 April 2008
Mike owns a penetration testing company. Mike agreed to meet us on condition we discuss our work at one of the countries largest media companies.
So we met him at the pub.
He turned up and he began to enquire about the company we worked for.
He wanted to know which other suppliers we dealt with for penetration testing and whether we had any test reports to show him.
We said nothing - and he left.
We never heard from him again.
Does he sound like an ethical hacker?
Or perhaps, he was just an undercover spy?
Thursday, 3 April 2008
Wednesday, 2 April 2008
CI analysis is most effective when it is conducted in both top down and bottom up manner simultaneously, in combination with both internal and external perspective building. Where approaches differ is in how the workforce are to be influenced to support a centralised CI analysis resource.
Many companies prefer to take the "SAS parachute them in approach" where they drop the CI analyst in behind enemy lines under cover of dark and expect them to slowly develop the intelligence assets in order to develop effective perspective, in order to begin the process of identifying, synthesising and presenting CI in ways that provide significant value. Of course, if they succeed they get to stay on. If they fail, they suddenly disappear - with (strangely) no one accountable for their actions.
Of course the other way is an executive led approach, where the managment team of the day are seen to be directly influencing the implementation and acceptance of the new CI unit within the body of the company.
We have seen both approaches succeed and both approaches fail.
Much depends on qualifying the customers requirements and organisational fit for CI, prior to choosing the correct approach to implementing CI.
Whilst many CI professionals are dedicated to their jobs and highly qualified in terms of their technical and business analysis accumen, we have found that there are blind spots in terms of how CI analysts qualify the customers intentions. For some customers, CI is a tool to be used for reducing the power accrued by middle management. Other customers look upon CI as being an administrative device for centralising, organising and representing commercial data. Others look upon CI as a strategic mechanism for leveraging and positioning their products and business etc.
Whatever the customers intentions - be sure you get behind it.
It will make a real difference to how you should approach CI and ultimately how it will be received by your customer.
Tuesday, 1 April 2008
Some years back the Robots were asked to advise on the nature and colour of technology requirement. There were two competeting technologies. One was from Microsoft and the other the open source operating system, Linux.
Our initial investigation concluded that the Microsoft technology was less secure than the open source equivalent. It was clear that the open source product was better designed and could be 'hot patched' more rapidly than that of Microsoft technology. So on the surface of it we concluded that Linux was a far better offering in terms of security than Microsoft.
But as we got deeper and deeper into the debate we began to change our mind.
It suddenly became clear that many of those "so called" hackers were anti-Microsoft people, so there was clearly an agenda to discredit the Microsoft technology anyway - creating conditions which placed greater scrutiny on Microsoft security. Then it was brought to our attention that much of the code is created by thousands of disperate coders from here to Timbuktu. Many of these people are high calibre programmers, but many we interviewed were pretty ineffcient and those that were not - seemed like crackpots. We wondered how many of the security vulnerabilities in systems were being engineered by these people.
Anyway, the most worrying of all concerns about open source lies at the very heart of its cause. We can only wonder at how so many people have been fooled for so long.
Open Source is in fact only open to a minute number of programmers. It is not open to the general public, business managers or shareholders. It is open to a few software engineers who can understand the language and context of the C programming language and operating system architecture.
For everyone else, open source is no more open than Microsoft technologies.
So we ask, is open source a Wolf in sheeps clothing?
Is it really more secure than Microsoft technology?