ITSPmagazine Podcast Network

Hurricanes, Hacktivists, & HPCs: Building Resilience for the Compute Era | A Conversation With Dr. Melanie Garson and Sean Martin | Redefining Society with Marco Ciappelli

Episode Summary

In this episode, Dr. Melanie Garson, Cyber and Tech Geopolitics Lead at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, sheds light on the crucial intersection of technology, geopolitical dynamics, and infrastructure resilience in the face of cyber threats and natural disasters. Discover how our reliance on emerging technologies demands a holistic approach to safeguarding our interconnected world.

Episode Notes

Guests: ✨

Dr. Melanie Garson, Cyber Policy & Tech Geopolitics Lead, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change [@InstituteGC]

On LinkedIn | https://www.linkedin.com/in/melaniegarson/

Sean Martin, Co-Founder at ITSPmagazine [@ITSPmagazine] and Host of Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast [@RedefiningCyber]

On ITSPmagazine | https://www.itspmagazine.com/sean-martin

____________________________

Host: Marco Ciappelli, Co-Founder at ITSPmagazine [@ITSPmagazine] and Host of Redefining Society Podcast

On ITSPmagazine | https://www.itspmagazine.com/itspmagazine-podcast-radio-hosts/marco-ciappelli
_____________________________

This Episode’s Sponsors

BlackCloak 👉 https://itspm.ag/itspbcweb

Bugcrowd 👉 https://itspm.ag/itspbgcweb

_____________________________

Episode Introduction

In an era where technology is the backbone of society, resilience in the face of cyber threats, natural disasters, and geopolitical strife is paramount. This was the focal point of the discussion between Sean Martin, Marco Ciappelli, and Dr. Melanie Garson in their recent conversation on "Hurricanes, Hacktivists, & HPCs: Building Resilience for the Compute Era."

Dr. Melanie Garson, the Cyber and Tech Geopolitics Lead at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change and Associate Professor at University College London, brings a wealth of expertise to the topic. Her work revolves around understanding how new and disruptive technologies like cyber warfare, brain-computer interfaces, and genetic engineering affect global stability. This episode delves into her insights on the evolving landscape of cyber resilience and the steps needed to brace for future challenges.

The conversation begins with an exploration of how legacy infrastructure poses a significant risk to our digital and physical security. Dr. Garson emphasizes the importance of addressing these foundational elements, noting examples like the 2006 earthquake in Taiwan, which disrupted 22 communication cables. She warns of the potential catastrophes linked to outdated infrastructure and underscores the need for modernization and robust protection against not just cyberattacks but physical disruptions as well.

The geopolitical aspect of technology is another critical element discussed. Dr. Garson highlights the role of private companies like Microsoft and Amazon in global conflicts, noting the effects seen during the Russia-Ukraine conflict where cloud services played a pivotal role in preserving data. This involvement signals a shift in how we understand power dynamics and control over critical technologies and raises questions about the responsibilities and decision-making processes of these tech giants. Furthermore, the discussion covers the intersection of emergency situations and technological dependencies.

Using real-world instances like the hurricane in West Africa that knocked out major cables, Marco Ciappelli and Sean Martin emphasize how such events lead to significant economic impacts, illustrating how interconnected and vulnerable our systems are. Dr. Garson also touches upon the evolving nature of warfare, especially with the advent of electromagnetic spectrum manipulation and the reliance on GPS technologies. She notes the increasing use of electromagnetic interference for strategic advantage, a trend seen in ongoing global conflicts. The idea of compute diplomacy—ensuring countries have the sustainable computational power needed to remain competitive and secure—resonates strongly throughout their dialogue.

The conversation wrapped with a powerful call to action: the need for both public and private sectors to address vulnerabilities throughout the entire tech stack, not just the application layer. This holistic approach is essential to safeguarding our digital infrastructure against a multitude of threats.

In conclusion, building resilience in the compute era requires a multi-faceted approach that integrates robust cyber defense, modernized infrastructure, and a keen understanding of the geopolitical landscape. The insights shared by Dr. Melanie Garson underscore the importance of proactive measures and collaborative efforts in securing our interconnected world. This episode serves as a crucial reminder that as technology advances, so must our strategies to protect against emerging threats.

Episode Transcription

Hurricanes, Hacktivists, & HPCs: Building Resilience for the Compute Era | A Conversation With Dr. Melanie Garson and Sean Martin | Redefining Society with Marco Ciappelli

Please note that this transcript was created using AI technology and may contain inaccuracies or deviations from the original audio file. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as a substitute for the original recording, as errors may exist. At this time, we provide it “as it is,” and we hope it can be helpful for our audience.

_________________________________________

Sean Martin: [00:00:00] Marco. Sean. Did you pull the plug?

Marco Ciappelli: Uh, yeah, but it's still going.

Sean Martin: So now it stayed online. I don't know.

Marco Ciappelli: How is that possible? That's the biggest fear. Can you unplug really?

Sean Martin: I saw you drive away and the plug was still attached.

Marco Ciappelli: Yeah, it still freaks me out that when you turn off your iPhone or smartphone.

It's still going to track you, so I don't know, and it's not about closing the computer and closing the door anymore, and everything is going to, I don't know if you were going to go with there with this, but, uh, that's what I'm thinking about.

Sean Martin: There you

go.

Melanie Garson: Let's make Joe COVID, I told him when we had bans on like going out more than once a day, it was like, look at the phones in the cupboard somewhere.

We're going for work. Don't bring them with you.

Sean Martin: Toss it in the freezer. That's what I was told. My GPS says I'm in the freezer all the time. I don't know.

Melanie Garson: Inside the microwave [00:01:00] probably works too.

Marco Ciappelli: They'll probably mess up things a little bit.

Melanie Garson: Not with it on. But like, inside the microwave.

Marco Ciappelli: Oh boy. Oh boy, if it was, if it was that simple, that would have been

Sean Martin: mixed signals there.

All right. Uh, well, we're having fun, but, uh, we're, we're about to get pretty serious. I think we'll, we'll still have fun along the way, but we're looking at, uh, the, the state of resilience, I think across, across the globe. I mean, really, and we're going to look at clearly the world of cyber, uh, obviously Mark was on, so we're going to be looking at the world of, of, uh, geopolitics and political science and how, how we as a globe can work together to stay alive.

I think that's the biggest picture for me. That's, uh, that's what I'm interested in. And it all starts perhaps with that cable. Um, [00:02:00] maybe a big one that goes under sea, who knows? Um, we're going to, we're going to have a good chat with Dr. Melanie Garson, who's on the show. Dr. Thanks for joining us.

Melanie Garson: Thank you for inviting me.

Sean Martin: And, uh, this is triggered, this is gonna be published on both our channels, Marco Redefining Society, redefining Cybersecurity, and, uh, it was, it was prompted or inspired by a talk to you I've already given Doctor. And, uh, so we're gonna dig into that. The title of that talk was Hurricanes, activists, and H HPCs Building Resilience.

for the compute era. And, uh, I'm excited to get into it. But before we do that, a bit about who you are, what you're up to and, and what prompted you to put, put that talk together.

Melanie Garson: Um, thank you. Well, I'm, uh, Dr. Melanie Gosselin. I'm, uh, Sort of wear two hats, both of them good, I think, uh, and, uh, um, I'm, uh, the Cyber and Tech Geopolitics [00:03:00] Lead at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change.

I'm also an Associate Professor at University College London in the Political Science Department, where amongst other things I teach, uh, my baby is called From Cyber Warfare to Robots, the Future of Conflict in the Digital Age. And so my whole world is thinking about new and disruptive technology. I mean, in that course, we go from cyber through to things like brain computer interfaces and genetic engineering of soldier 2.

0 and anything that could really, uh, shake up how we think about life, society, future, defense, stability. But, um, so a lot of what I do in both places is really think about what is, you know, the structure of stability of the world order and how that's being reshaped, particularly by new technologies, or who are the owners, holders, or the distribution.

of those new technologies and how that potentially reshapes [00:04:00] the world order and what we need to do to rethink that to have a sort of be a if internet and everything on it is a coming increasingly a public good or the lifeblood of everything we do is it always going to be there when we need it.

Marco Ciappelli: Well, I wrote down about in my head about 25 to 30 questions for you, so maybe I'll let Sean go, but one point I want to make is as a political science, uh, graduate myself back in the days, we didn't even talk about this kind of things.

I'm like talking in the 90s when I, when I finished political science and, you know, He was more military oriented. There was still the technology always a big part in every war, obviously, in the past, even when, you know, technology was a sport or then a gun or whatever. But now it's out of control. And your point about involving the private sector, it's really Really [00:05:00] interesting to, to me.

So Sean,

Sean Martin: well, no, that's not, of course it is. No, but I, I just published a podcast. You were on this one with me as well. Marco with K to spree, where we were looking at, uh, the Latin American region, South American region. And one of the things that we talked about there that I think we can bring into this conversation is the idea that.

The technology that you choose to use as a nation, as a region can shape and potentially position you on the political stage, geopolitical stage in one way or another, just by selecting one technology, you might align yourself with another country that you may or may not share the same values with, but there you are.

And, and I think. I connect that to kind of the, the digital divide where oftentimes [00:06:00] it's, it's brought down to the consumer level, but I think it's going to impact nations as well and states as well. Those that have the funds and the skills and this and the, and the people to really understand what they're doing and why they're doing it with using the technology is really going to define how they.

sit in this, in this grand world stage that we're all out. So any thoughts on that?

Melanie Garson: Uh, no, I think it's really good point. And the point that it's, so I think we've got already that fundamental divide on multiple levels. And one is that who the baseline infrastructure providers are. And if you're looking at whether it's Huawei, that's, you know, Sort of, you know, I've just come back from Africa and that's a cyber conference.

So two big presenters there, Huawei and Kaspersky, right. And, you know, and they've made massive inroads. They've been reliable partners for these States and [00:07:00] fundamentally then for those States, trying to connect in in a cyber secure way with other States. That's already challenging when we're looking at zero trust supply chain.

So there's sort of already that element, but this infrastructure development picture is it's so multifaceted in the fact that there's still baseline infrastructure to get in place to be able to enable the big partners. To come in and something like compute sort of like big, large scale compute is so far off the radar screen.

But then you get these sorts of weirdness things where you get a country like Senegal that buys a supercomputer because they want to be on the list of countries that have a supercomputer. And it's literally unplugged in a basement. Because they don't have an ecosystem to build it to, you know, to actually use it.

So there's these divides are coming [00:08:00] more accelerated both from a geopolitical context and because of that geopolitical concept it's widening the gap for spaces for other companies to go and invest in. So it's um, not necessarily an easy or pretty picture.

Marco Ciappelli: Was it somehow predictable? And we just didn't worry so much about it.

And where I'm going with this is because I just had a conversation about the tick tock ban with there is a python. And so, you know, talking about other way that you can fight wars nowadays, manipulation, information, collecting data and all of that. And how, you know, the band may not be the right solution.

But then we start looking at, you know, a higher way. And how that as an hardware and provider of 5g and all of that was actually something that was even more, uh, worrisome. So did we just let it got in like the internet? Um, let's just start the internet. We worry about [00:09:00] security or is this something that we could have predicted at a political level?

Melanie Garson: Um, I think we could have predicted it. I think we. I think the West as a whole and, uh, and this goes across all their foreign policy investment development has been, I think they're enthusiastic, but fickle. They like to go in for short periods of time and they don't play the long game, China, Russia. plays a long game.

And, and they did. And although some of that infrastructure, and we've heard the stories, particularly of sort of roads that lead to nowhere, but there's sufficient reliance in those places. And some of the places, if you go to places in Southeast Asia, can they live without, Google search. Absolutely. Can they live without their fundamental infrastructure?

Not at all. So, and that then is skewing things [00:10:00] like conversations in the ITU. This is sort of where the intersection, I think, didn't really anticipate when you're trying to stop something like IP6 or where you're looking at those conversations to keep the free open interoperability. Internet and countries automatically then going to vote with their infrastructure provider, even if they're not really thinking about the impact of that, because that's got such power over their system.

So I think it's all the confluence of that and, and to replace it now, you know, the US has them to rip and replace programs in some places in Eastern Europe, but that's a massive cost. Although I was on my travels a couple of weeks ago, um, saw a new startup. that's doing very, very cool stuff on, on the fiber optic layer, actually, on being able to create security at that fiber optic layer.

And my first question to them was, would that mean that fundamental sort of using subsea cables from places like Huawei, [00:11:00] would you now be able to have data complete security over those, whoever the infrastructure provider are? And that answer to that was actually technically, yes, I think we're getting to spaces where can still protect and keep privacy and data security on those layers, but that's only just coming up now.

Sean Martin: And of course, privacy, confidentiality. Just one piece of the puzzle. Um, especially when we're talking about resilience, you say, can they live without Google or can live without infrastructure? Um, there's a physical element to this, which is one of the things that struck me with the, the abstract for your talk.

I think we often, certainly in the. Cyber world where we're looking at it and perhaps OT systems and software, we often forget that beyond those systems, there are other things, right? Critical infrastructure, pipes, wires, cables, all [00:12:00] this stuff. How do you see this coming together in terms of who, who's looking after it?

in terms of, uh, of policy and an understanding of where we, the greater we are at risk.

Melanie Garson: I think, uh, the greater we are not thinking about it enough. That's why I've got a little bit of an obsession about it at the moment, because I call it the kind of what lies beneath the problem. So the conversation right now, particularly because everything's like generative AI and everything is about building advanced tools.

And it's kind of like we're layering and layering stuff on the pyramid and the side conversation is like, Hey, we need to protect all these advanced tools that are going to wreak havoc over the system as people sort of trying to get them faster than. Anywhere else. And then there's this sort of whole layer of infrastructure, particularly fundamental communications infrastructure, some of which is quite legacy right now.

So, you know, we have the OT problem, but also [00:13:00] where, um, you know, people just take for granted that it's just going to be there. And I think what we've seen over, you know, we've seen it previously in, um, Yeah. In instances of, say, the volcano in Tonga that took out their subsea cable for, you know, six weeks it went out.

But people think, well, it's a little island in Tonga, that's not, you know, how important to them, but it doesn't come home. But for me, for instance, this is where you get this confluence. That's why the name of my talk was sort of hacktivists, hurricane hacktivists and HPCs, because where do we get all the three like that real triple whammy covering it?

So you get Things like the hurricanes. We saw that in West Africa, a couple of weeks ago, it wasn't even a hurricane, minor, minor motion on the seabed knocked out, um, one of the major cables. And most of West Africa lost like internet quite significantly to the point that the Kenyan stock [00:14:00] exchange had to stay open for extra trading that night because they lost so much sort of productivity time.

So we've got this real like economic impact. of what's going on or when, you know, if we combine that then with like hacks of it's also coming into it. So when people said, um, when the Houthis started attacking in the Red Sea. And people asked me both, like, kind of with my geopolitical hat on, rather than my cyber hat on, what are you worried about?

And my first point was the cables. I'm like, what are you talking about? It's like, if you looked at some of the Telegram channels, the Hooties were already showing pictures of the Subsea Cable Network and saying, you know, let's throw the West, you know, into the dark. So I sort of hooted back, supporting hacktivist, uh, groups.

And so then. And eventually a cable got hit. Now, whether that was deliberate or whether that was, you know, just because you've got so much movement going on, something's bound to happen. [00:15:00] Then I know that people don't clock that 24 percent of the traffic between east and west was affected, which was a massive amount.

And think about who gets, you know, picks that up. And then you take someone like Taiwan, where you bring in the HPCs where we're relying on their semiconductor. Right. And you know, they had an earthquake. So you've got like one of the most significant places for our whole internet compute infrastructure that we look at on one of the worst located places on earth is in like, you know, to play tectonically challenged.

Let's put it that way. Um, hacktivists, I think they had something like last 2023, they had a 3370 percent rise. in cyber attacks, particularly in advance of the elections. And, you know, we're dealing with, my God, semiconductors. So when the earthquake happened a couple of weeks ago, everyone's like, oh my God, you know, what's happening [00:16:00] with, how will that affect semiconductor trade?

Of course, I thought cables. In 2006, when they had a similar event, 22 cables went down in that whole area. So it's only this confluence of all three that makes us think, okay, well, what happens when it goes down? We're reliant, we're pushing out to the skies. That's what happens. Right? And that's reliant on one very quixotic individual as to whether we have connectivity right now.

And that's being played by And are we really And are we really thinking about our national level of global resilience? In the hands of that person that do we need to be thinking that out better?

Marco Ciappelli: All

right

Because i'm still thinking about Like you you teach international negotiation and you know again I like [00:17:00] always to think the past and where we are and where we're gonna be so before was it just a diplomat work You know, you meet there as a state presence and you try to figure out things, which is still happening, at least in the news, but there is so many players.

You're just explaining right now that our commercial player that I have control over things. So you mentioned now we go in space. Now you're talking about activists that I'm thinking, like, despite the technology that we have, all you have to do is really going in. Yeah. You know, and cut the cable, like no more phone in your house anymore, or, uh, so how does the dynamic of this kind of.

International conflict resolution negotiation take place now that we have to involve very powerful commercial private entity that can make good or bad weather.

Melanie Garson: Yeah, I think this is something that's really [00:18:00] accelerated since Ukraine conflict where we've seen that it's actually whether it's Microsoft, Amazon.

Starlink coming into play and so increasingly I suddenly know in the U. S. that some of these key decisions have had, you know, Microsoft in the room. Microsoft has now an office in like opposite the U. N. They're part of, they're sort of capitalizing for these conversations. They have a Department of Digital Diplomacy and that thinks about it a little bit more.

But there's, there's And so there's two elements of that. One, there's a real tension in thinking about, well, we have to accept where these companies are. We have to think about how, but do we know how they will act within the system? You're an expert, you're still a political scientist, you know, stability comes from the, you know, rules based order and having a rough idea of how actors are going to, you know, React in any given situation, but these are still private [00:19:00] companies.

They have shareholders. They answer to a whole different body as well. So one of the things I've argued for a while is to say, well, to, um, it's a good plug for tech companies to hire more political scientists, but do tech companies on their boards actually need to have some sort of, sort of digital alongside their ESG, do they?

Because we have no sense of what will be their decision making procedure as to how they intervene. in different places and how they deal with those challenges. So in, it seemed, it wasn't simply Russia Ukraine because there was a lot of questions with backbone infrastructure providers going out and was that right?

Because it meant that you couldn't get normal information, you couldn't get counter information to normal Russian people. But we've seen that more acutely, if not a little in the Israel Hamas conflict, where now that Google AWS runs project [00:20:00] Nimbus, which is the Israeli sovereign cloud and people reacting about that.

And, you know, the question of can companies control what's in their data of what to concede the data that's in the cloud and control what it's useful, should they be able to, should they be value neutral, you know, where does this sit in this bigger picture? So I think what I would argue for, we need better clarity.

We need better commitment with sort of a sense of. What's that code of conduct going to look like, or do we begin to bring them in to a new version of, I mean, we're seeing it more and more, but into those global conversations and recognizing their geopolitical significance.

Sean Martin: And it's funny, as you're talking, I'm, I'm thinking who has the power to control or manipulate all that stuff.

But as you, as you were starting to talk about that, all I could think about was power, like [00:21:00] literal plugging power. I know data centers for a long time, and I'm sure they still do rely on backup power units for when local power goes away. But I mean, we're talking about resiliency of. Critical infrastructure and power plants.

And we, we see those getting blown up, right? And, and even, even if we figure out the, the technology to power all the stuff we want to do with supercomputers and all these AI and advanced graphics and all this other stuff that we're envisioning, quantum computing, whatnot,

if we,

the more we rely on those technologies, when we achieve them, the more reliant on the power.

And the backup power and the electricity and everything generating it, storing it, all that stuff. So any, any, cause you touched on ESG too, which I think is how do we generate that power? There's another part of it. So I don't know. It's a big, big bucket there, but thoughts. [00:22:00]

Melanie Garson: No, it's a, it's a massive question.

And one of the things we recently did an access to compute index. And part of that was You know, looking at particularly for this digital divide question, and as I said, the amount of, you know, where countries invest and what are the levers for their investment. There's no amount of supercomputers that you can build that will increase your cloud access.

You need to deal with your baseline power grid resilience, which is, you know, very sketchy. I think there are models, and I think this is where we begin to look at, I guess, responsible compute. And I think, you know, recently Sam Altman was on, uh, you know, a lecture from a podcast. He was talking about compute being the new currency or being the new most precious commodity.

But are we going to actually have to think about, I call it compute diplomacy. Right. Do we need to think about where there's models of clusters where you build the power hungry bit in the place that's [00:23:00] most equipped to create that sustainable power, whether that's Norway, where you can make it, you know, they're submerging data centers where you could use so where you can make sure that the power that's generated is going back into the power grid.

So there's lots of potentially clever, sustainable solutions. But you could do with it. But yeah, the, I think keeping the power grid. I mean, that's the other bit, both from a cyber perspective, again, loads of OT devices within power grids that make it super challenging across the board. And, you know, keeping it running for our needs is going to be one of the, you know, the greatest challenges that we have to do and, I don't know.

I sat through a cyber simulation game, um, it's actually with the CLTC in, uh, Berkeley. They, they did a paper recently on the future. I think the simulation I was in, was in this sort of [00:24:00] desolate AI wasteland where power has to be rationed because of the huge consumption of, you know, power. That's the, you know, that real McCarthy, the road, but the desert one.

Sean Martin: Yeah. You said ration. Like I was thinking earlier about the, uh, Rationing petrol fuel, right? When, when things are tough standing in line to get your share.

Marco Ciappelli: I mean, and I'm thinking like, so the priority now when, when there is a conflict, it seems to me that when you look at Ukraine or you look at, you know, other wars that are happening right now, it's about, you know, heating the infrastructure. Try to put the the regular population into a state of difficulties in the winter or Cutting the electric grid attacking the airport.

I mean that's still the same old let's say game but [00:25:00] in the future scenario where Yeah, it seems to me that he's changing. He's going to change into yeah the who control the computer Before we used to try to control the media, right? I mean as soon as you get somewhere and during the world war you will get to the radio station and And the TV, because if you control communication, I'm not quoting George Orwell here, but if you control the past and the books and the information you're controlling everything, now it seems like it's so much more layers there that, you know, what is the primary resource now, is it?

Computing power, really?

Melanie Garson: Um, I think data is still part of it. And I think, I mean, it's, you know, it's multi domain warfare anyway. And I think, and that's why I think it's interesting. I mean, Russia, when you look at Russia's conception of cyber operations, they don't separate between information warfare and what we would think of as sort of cyber attacks, either.

It's [00:26:00] all part of their strategic conception in one go. And so it's that multi domain warfare element. And. So I think one of the, so we, as we saw with Ukraine, one of the key things was they had all their data on premises in country, you know, this question of sovereign data and AWS and Microsoft worked very quickly and diligently to get it out of country.

That was key for them, keeping their data app, their digital identity, um, app working for people, but also then denied. And I think this is where we get this question. companies again. They denied Russia a huge part of their strategic ambition. They tip the balance of power by saying you couldn't capture that data.

You couldn't hit that data if that was so, you know, what was their strategic ambition? Um, then Russia had hit Viasat, they hit, tried to hit the communications, normal strategic point, hit the comms, capture, [00:27:00] right? Stalin came in, tipped the balance of power again, and we got, and I think that's why we're seeing a lot of electronic warfare right now, and, but I think what's really interesting, particularly on the warfare thing, and where we're becoming to rely on the, I'm increasingly interested in the, like, where the electromagnetic spectrum is playing in this and electromagnetic warfare, because I think it's where this GPS jamming is becoming crucial as part of defensive architecture, and yet we're relying on GPS.

We're building in, again, advanced AI enabled tools that rely on GPS. for our daily lives. So there's, you know, great storage right now if you're particularly if you're in. Um, it's all right now and they've got GPS jamming in place that you open your telephone and you're technically, your telephone will say you're in Beirut or [00:28:00] you're in Jordan or you may be as far as, you know, any sort of number of places because you try and pick up your delivery or equivalent.

Let's say you're very far from home right now, but that's had meaningful impacts. So for instance, on the northern border where They've got advanced AI enabled sort of crop dusting drains and tractors and younger generation don't know how to operate the machinery without the GPS aspect of it. So they had to like call 70 out and say, you know what, you're going to have to drive the tractors because nobody else can use it without the GPS.

So really thinking about where, what happens at that intersection? And do you make it resilient? How do you make your daily life resilient at times that security? Requires you to do that level of jamming.

Sean Martin: I just, uh, it's coming out next week. Just recorded an episode of a gentleman named Philip Miller. He's a CISO and a farmer. We [00:29:00] talked a lot about this, uh, about the, the, the tech driven farm and, and how much there is, how much reliance there is on, on the satellites and information and other sensors and other technologies to keep things running and bring costs down for the farmers so that we can actually afford food.

And obviously the supply chain is another story as part of that as well. Um, if the trucks can't keep cold because the computers on the trucks are wonky, or if they can't find their way to the store because the GPS is out, it's just endless, sadly, and endless stream of opportunities for bad things to happen.

Melanie Garson: I think it's,

I know it

doesn't say, I think it's rather, we think of, you know, we've always talked about the kill chain. I think we need to think about a kill web. It's certainly not a kill chain anymore. It's a lot more interconnected,

Marco Ciappelli: you know, it's interesting. I get a reflection as [00:30:00] we start wrapping here, the community, the academic community having this conversation is very important.

I'm sure states are having this conversation. Conference are helping with this where you connect legislators with with technician technologist and especially in cyber security. I don't think it's the regular population. We realize that, you know, like you just mentioned the farming, but I can think of many people that without the The GPS, they probably wouldn't be able to come back home, you know, and that's just a little thing.

And how many layers we have again, you know, it's, it's, it's almost like to the point where you can't visualize it. I've cut in the cable, uh, the phone cable at your house. Therefore, you don't have phone anymore because it's so much more complex than that, that we just are so in bed. In our technology, we just don't, don't realize how many things can [00:31:00] affect that from the health care system to, you know, medical devices, and I mean, we can make an ever ending list of this.

Sean Martin: Well, the lesson for me there, because I used to live in a place where there were fires, and I used to have a landline thinking, I'd like to have the landline because that's where they notify the people in the area that there's a fire. Except that doesn't work if the poles are burnt. So, and oh, we'll just use cell signal.

Well, guess what? There's no cell signal in this area that I live. So I can't rely on that. So what do you have to, you turn to a different, different mechanism.

Melanie Garson: You have shortwave radio, shortwave radio, like every house should have a shortwave radio. Every, I remember reading an article.

Marco Ciappelli: Back to the basic waves, radio waves still work really good.

Melanie Garson: But you know, you talk about the information, the information architecture, that was one of the things that happened in Russia when, so because all the backbone come [00:32:00] internet companies had to come out, Cogen, Lumen, there was issues with providing VPNs and, you know, for all the U. S. countries where it reshaped within Russia.

The information access, but with people still wanted to get that counter information to Russians of what was happening. How do you read that? And that's the first thing that Russians started doing. They started dusting off, um, their shortwave radios from the attic. And that's where you suddenly got a rush where BBC and I think also public broadcasting from the U.

S. suddenly sort of reinstated some of their Russian language programs. To start getting that counter information through.

Marco Ciappelli: Remember that, that article. Well, fascinating.

Sean Martin: It is, it is. Well, as, as we close here, and Marco might have a similar question to me, sometimes I remember to ask, but what, and it's a big question, what, [00:33:00] looking to the future, what can we do To redefine cybersecurity so that we have a, a safer, safer environment to live in.

Melanie Garson: Uh, , that's a great question. Um, billion dollar que billion dollar . Why billion dollar question for some companies? I think cyber security, I think certainly the challenge I would say to the entrepreneurs, the, the companies is to look down the stack. Look at where the future of resilience is, you know, it's super, yeah, business email compromise.

Yeah, I get it's massive. It's massive business. AI is accelerating it, but look down the stack as to where, as I say, I saw great tech that was, looking at using fiber optics, you know, really smart physics, like very, very smart businesses of looking at how you can then build security on the fiber optics.

But let's look at what the alternative. [00:34:00] And I think we definitely need to be looking at the resilience of the whole space communication system. There's going to be a push up to space. So, um, Cyber for space communications and for the receiver stations. So also remembering what is the whole chain, as I say, we're really good at the application layer of bits of like, we'll do the satellites.

But we're the satellite speaking to because there's another vulnerability. So really having that picture of what is the vulnerability chain. So if I were a brilliant technical person, which I'm, I can only give the ideas of the brilliant technical people, but that's something to keep in mind. Like step back.

Yeah. There's a thing on the Japanese art of swordsmanship, where they always say, imagine your enemy. Look at it as if you're standing off a far off mountain. So stand back, look at the whole, whether it's, you know, vulnerability, [00:35:00] web vulnerability chain, And then think about where's those weaknesses that people are forgetting and secure them.

Sean Martin: Nice one.

Marco Ciappelli: Yeah, I love it Yeah, they're like all this stuff up there But then how do we get the message like you can have all the radio wave in the world But if you don't have a receiver in your house, it's just going to go through. So I like the idea. It's like when they say, you know, maybe, maybe look at what is very close to you and that where maybe the, the, the, the, the, the weak element.

And don't blame people.

That too, I play Marco. Well, great. Yeah. Blame it on me.

Sean Martin: Cause remember he's the, he's the one that drove the car away that pulled the undersea cable with him.

Marco Ciappelli: I cannot not think about airplane. The movie, [00:36:00] you know, whoops.

Well, great conversation, Dr. Garson. I really enjoyed it. I, I, I'm a, Sean is a geek for cybersecurity. I, I geek out on this kind of, you know, thinking, so glad that, uh, we did this all of us together, got different angles and, uh, hopefully we'll get to meet you in one of our London trip and, um, and stay in touch with all the things that you do.

Sean Martin: Yeah.

Marco Ciappelli: Perfect.

Sean Martin: Keep up the good fight.

Marco Ciappelli: so much.

Melanie Garson: Likewise. Okay. Take care. Bye.