>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, This is "Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante". >> Black Hat 22 was held in Las Vegas last week, the same time as theCUBE Supercloud event. Unlike AWS re:Inforce where words are carefully chosen to put a positive spin on security, Black Hat exposes all the warts of cyber and openly discusses its hard truths. It's a conference that's attended by technical experts who proudly share some of the vulnerabilities they've discovered, and, of course, by numerous vendors marketing their products and services. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis", we summarize what we learned from discussions with several people who attended Black Hat and our analysis from reviewing dozens of keynotes, articles, sessions, and data from a recent Black Hat Attendees Survey conducted by Black Hat and Informa, and we'll end with the discussion of what it all means for the challenges around securing the supercloud. Now, I personally did not attend, but as I said at the top, we reviewed a lot of content from the event which is renowned for its hundreds of sessions, breakouts, and strong technical content that is, as they say, unvarnished. Chris Krebs, the former director of Us cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, CISA, he gave the keynote, and he spoke about the increasing complexity of tech stacks and the ripple effects that that has on organizational risk. Risk was a big theme at the event. Where re:Inforce tends to emphasize, again, the positive state of cybersecurity, it could be said that Black Hat, as the name implies, focuses on the other end of the spectrum. Risk, as a major theme of the event at the show, got a lot of attention. Now, there was a lot of talk, as always, about the expanded threat service, you hear that at any event that's focused on cybersecurity, and tons of emphasis on supply chain risk as a relatively new threat that's come to the CISO's minds. Now, there was also plenty of discussion about hybrid work and how remote work has dramatically increased business risk. According to data from in Intel 471's Mark Arena, the previously mentioned Black Hat Attendee Survey showed that compromise credentials posed the number one source of risk followed by infrastructure vulnerabilities and supply chain risks, so a couple of surveys here that we're citing, and we'll come back to that in a moment. At an MIT cybersecurity conference earlier last decade, theCUBE had a hypothetical conversation with former Boston Globe war correspondent, Charles Sennott, about the future of war and the role of cyber. We had similar discussions with Dr. Robert Gates on theCUBE at a ServiceNow event in 2016. At Black Hat, these discussions went well beyond the theoretical with actual data from the war in Ukraine. It's clear that modern wars are and will be supported by cyber, but the takeaways are that they will be highly situational, targeted, and unpredictable because in combat scenarios, anything can happen. People aren't necessarily at their keyboards. Now, the role of AI was certainly discussed as it is at every conference, and particularly cyber conferences. You know, it was somewhat dissed as over hyped, not surprisingly, but while AI is not a panacea to cyber exposure, automation and machine intelligence can definitely augment, what appear to be and have been stressed out, security teams can do this by recommending actions and taking other helpful types of data and presenting it in a curated form that can streamline the job of the SecOps team. Now, most cyber defenses are still going to be based on tried and true monitoring and telemetry data and log analysis and curating known signatures and analyzing consolidated data, but increasingly, AI will help with the unknowns, i.e. zero-day threats and threat actor behaviors after infiltration. Now, finally, while much lip service was given to collaboration and public-private partnerships, especially after Stuxsnet was revealed early last decade, the real truth is that threat intelligence in the private sector is still evolving. In particular, the industry, mid decade, really tried to commercially exploit proprietary intelligence and, you know, do private things like private reporting and monetize that, but attitudes toward collaboration are trending in a positive direction was one of the sort of outcomes that we heard at Black Hat. Public-private partnerships are being both mandated by government, and there seems to be a willingness to work together to fight an increasingly capable adversary. These things are definitely on the rise. Now, without this type of collaboration, securing the supercloud is going to become much more challenging and confined to narrow solutions. and we're going to talk about that little later in the segment. Okay, let's look at some of the attendees survey data from Black Hat. Just under 200 really serious security pros took the survey, so not enough to slice and dice by hair color, eye color, height, weight, and favorite movie genre, but enough to extract high level takeaways. You know, these strongly agree or disagree survey responses can sometimes give vanilla outputs, but let's look for the ones where very few respondents strongly agree or disagree with a statement or those that overwhelmingly strongly agree or somewhat agree. So it's clear from this that the respondents believe the following, one, your credentials are out there and available to criminals. Very few people thought that that was, you know, unavoidable. Second, remote work is here to stay, and third, nobody was willing to really jinx their firms and say that they strongly disagree that they'll have to respond to a major cybersecurity incident within the next 12 months. Now, as we've reported extensively, COVID has permanently changed the cybersecurity landscape and the CISO's priorities and playbook. Check out this data that queries respondents on the pandemic's impact on cybersecurity, new requirements to secure remote workers, more cloud, more threats from remote systems and remote users, and a shift away from perimeter defenses that are no longer as effective, e.g. firewall appliances. Note, however, the fifth response that's down there highlighted in green. It shows a meaningful drop in the percentage of remote workers that are disregarding corporate security policy, still too many, but 10 percentage points down from 2021 survey. Now, as we've said many times, bad user behavior will trump good security technology virtually every time. Consistent with the commentary from Mark Arena's Intel 471 threat report, fishing for credentials is the number one concern cited in the Black Hat Attendees Survey. This is a people and process problem more than a technology issue. Yes, using multifactor authentication, changing passwords, you know, using unique passwords, using password managers, et cetera, they're all great things, but if it's too hard for users to implement these things, they won't do it, they'll remain exposed, and their organizations will remain exposed. Number two in the graphic, sophisticated attacks that could expose vulnerabilities in the security infrastructure, again, consistent with the Intel 471 data, and three, supply chain risks, again, consistent with Mark Arena's commentary. Ask most CISOs their number one problem, and they'll tell you, "It's a lack of talent." That'll be on the top of their list. So it's no surprise that 63% of survey respondents believe they don't have the security staff necessary to defend against cyber threats. This speaks to the rise of managed security service providers that we've talked about previously on "Breaking Analysis". We've seen estimates that less than 50% of organizations in the US have a SOC, and we see those firms as ripe for MSSP support as well as larger firms augmenting staff with managed service providers. Now, after re:Invent, we put forth this conceptual model that discussed how the cloud was becoming the first line of defense for CISOs, and DevOps was being asked to do more, things like securing the runtime, the containers, the platform, et cetera, and audit was kind of that last line of defense. So a couple things we picked up from Black Hat which are consistent with this shift and some that are somewhat new, first, is getting visibility across the expanded threat surface was a big theme at Black Hat. This makes it even harder to identify risk, of course, this being the expanded threat surface. It's one thing to know that there's a vulnerability somewhere. It's another thing to determine the severity of the risk, but understanding how easy or difficult it is to exploit that vulnerability and how to prioritize action around that. Vulnerability is increasingly complex for CISOs as the security landscape gets complexified. So what's happening is the SOC, if there even is one at the organization, is becoming federated. No longer can there be one ivory tower that's the magic god room of data and threat detection and analysis. Rather, the SOC is becoming distributed following the data, and as we just mentioned, the SOC is being augmented by the cloud provider and the managed service providers, the MSSPs. So there's a lot of critical security data that is decentralized and this will necessitate a new cyber data model where data can be synchronized and shared across a federation of SOCs, if you will, or mini SOCs or SOC capabilities that live in and/or embedded in an organization's ecosystem. Now, to this point about cloud being the first line of defense, let's turn to a story from ETR that came out of our colleague Eric Bradley's insight in a one-on-one he did with a senior IR person at a manufacturing firm. In a piece that ETR published called "Saved by Zscaler", check out this comment. Quote, "As the last layer, we are filtering all the outgoing internet traffic through Zscaler. And when an attacker is already on your network, and they're trying to communicate with the outside to exchange encryption keys, Zscaler is already blocking the traffic. It happened to us. It happened and we were saved by Zscaler." So that's pretty cool. So not only is the cloud the first line of defense, as we sort of depicted in that previous graphic, here's an example where it's also the last line of defense. Now, let's end on what this all means to securing the supercloud. At our Supercloud 22 event last week in our Palo Alto CUBE Studios, we had a session on this topic on supercloud, securing the supercloud. Security, in our view, is going to be one of the most important and difficult challenges for the idea of supercloud to become real. We reviewed in last week's "Breaking Analysis" a detailed discussion with Snowflake co-founder and president of products, Benoit Dageville, how his company approaches security in their data cloud, what we call a superdata cloud. Snowflake doesn't use the term supercloud. They use the term datacloud, but what if you don't have the focus, the engineering depth, and the bank roll that Snowflake has? Does that mean superclouds will only be developed by those companies with deep pockets and enormous resources? Well, that's certainly possible, but on the securing the supercloud panel, we had three technical experts, Gee Rittenhouse of Skyhigh Security, Piyush Sharrma who's the founder of Accurics who sold to Tenable, and Tony Kueh, who's the former Head of Product at VMware. Now, John Furrier asked each of them, "What is missing? What's it going to take to secure the supercloud? What has to happen?" Here's what they said. Play the clip. >> This is the final question. We have one minute left. I wish we had more time. This is a great panel. We'll bring you guys back for sure after the event. What one thing needs to happen to unify or get through the other side of this fragmentation and then the challenges for supercloud? Because remember, the enterprise equation is solve complexity with more complexity. Well, that's not what the market wants. They want simplicity. They want SaaS. They want ease of use. They want infrastructure risk code. What has to happen? What do you think, each of you? >> So I can start, and extending to the previous conversation, I think we need a consortium. We need a framework that defines that if you really want to operate on supercloud, these are the 10 things that you must follow. It doesn't matter whether you take AWS, Slash, or TCP or you have all, and you will have the on-prem also, which means that it has to follow a pattern, and that pattern is what is required for supercloud, in my opinion. Otherwise, security is going everywhere. They're like they have to fix everything, find everything, and so on and so forth. It's not going to be possible. So they need a framework. They need a consortium, and this consortium needs to be, I think, needs to led by the cloud providers because they're the ones who have these foundational infrastructure elements, and the security vendor should contribute on providing more severe detections or severe findings. So that's, in my opinion, should be the model. >> Great, well, thank you, Gee. >> Yeah, I would think it's more along the lines of a business model. We've seen in cloud that the scale matters, and once you're big, you get bigger. We haven't seen that coalesce around either a vendor, a business model, or whatnot to bring all of this and connect it all together yet. So that value proposition in the industry, I think, is missing, but there's elements of it already available. >> I think there needs to be a mindset. If you look, again, history repeating itself. The internet sort of came together around set of IETF, RSC standards. Everybody embraced and extended it, right? But still, there was, at least, a baseline, and I think at that time, the largest and most innovative vendors understood that they couldn't do it by themselves, right? And so I think what we need is a mindset where these big guys, like Google, let's take an example. They're not going to win at all, but they can have a substantial share. So how do they collaborate with the ecosystem around a set of standards so that they can bring their differentiation and then embrace everybody together. >> Okay, so Gee's point about a business model is, you know, business model being missing, it's broadly true, but perhaps Snowflake serves as a business model where they've just gone out and and done it, setting or trying to set a de facto standard by which data can be shared and monetized. They're certainly setting that standard and mandating that standard within the Snowflake ecosystem with its proprietary framework. You know, perhaps that is one answer, but Tony lays out a scenario where there's a collaboration mindset around a set of standards with an ecosystem. You know, intriguing is this idea of a consortium or a framework that Piyush was talking about, and that speaks to the collaboration or lack thereof that we spoke of earlier, and his and Tony's proposal that the cloud providers should lead with the security vendor ecosystem playing a supporting role is pretty compelling, but can you see AWS and Azure and Google in a kumbaya moment getting together to make that happen? It seems unlikely, but maybe a better partnership between the US government and big tech could be a starting point. Okay, that's it for today. I want to thank the many people who attended Black Hat, reported on it, wrote about it, gave talks, did videos, and some that spoke to me that had attended the event, Becky Bracken, who is the EIC at Dark Reading. They do a phenomenal job and the entire team at Dark Reading, the news desk there, Mark Arena, whom I mentioned, Garrett O'Hara, Nash Borges, Kelly Jackson, sorry, Kelly Jackson Higgins, Roya Gordon, Robert Lipovsky, Chris Krebs, and many others, thanks for the great, great commentary and the content that you put out there, and thanks to Alex Myerson, who's on production, and Alex manages the podcasts for us. Ken Schiffman is also in our Marlborough studio as well, outside of Boston. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters, and Rob Hoff is our Editor-in-Chief at SiliconANGLE and does some great editing and helps with the titles of "Breaking Analysis" quite often. Remember these episodes, they're all available as podcasts, wherever you listen, just search for "Breaking Analysis Podcasts". I publish each on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com, and you could email me, get in touch with me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or you can DM me @dvellante or comment on my LinkedIn posts, and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (upbeat music)

>> From Boston, Massachusetts, it's theCUBE, covering LiveWorx 18. Brought to you by PTC. >> Welcome back to Boston, everybody, to the LiveWorx show, hashtag LiveWorx with an "x" at the end. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live-tech coverage. My name is Dave Vellante, and I'm with my co-host Stu Miniman. Mario Armstrong is here. He's a two-time Emmy winner, contributor to NBC today. He's the creator of the "Never Settle Show". He's an NPR contributor. >> Yep. >> And the host of LiveWorx. >> Yeah! >> Thanks so much coming on theCUBE. >> Yeah, it's a pleasure to see both of you. Good to see you too, Stu. Thanks for having me on the show. >> So yeah, this morning, a lot of action-- >> Yes. >> First of all, I tweeted out, that was like an Olympic opening, I mean-- >> That open was phenomenal. I mean, an LED-lit troop, full LED uniforms on, being acrobatic, what you can't see behind the scenes, by the way, 'cause you think it's kind of like Cirque du Soleil type of thing, with like, tech, but what you don't see are, like, these three other people that are way in the back behind the scenes, going up, scaling up and down like this truss that's like dropping them or raising them. It's just, the performance was phenomenal. >> Yeah, it was really great. And you kicked it off... 6,000 plus people here. >> Yes. >> You said the largest digital transformation conference on the planet, which of course, we were joking. Everybody says their digital-- >> Yeah. (laughs) >> But this really is digital transformation, isn't it? >> It's a lot that's taking place. I mean when you think about manufacturing, smart manufacturing, when you think about how you're trying to accelerate processes and you start looking at where things were like 20 or 30 years ago and how physical things had to be and how you actually had to, like, maybe even work on a thing then leave it, go to another place, report on it, come back to it, tweak it, and so now when you start seeing the merging of AI, VR, and so you're taking the physical and the human, and you're putting these... and the virtual, and you're putting these things together, you're seeing things like what PTC is showing us today. I mean, some of the demonstrations that I saw were absolutely mind blowing in terms of the acceleration of the process that you can actually get things done with how they're merging the different technologies and integrating them together. >> Yes, Stu and I, we're talking earlier, it's hard to get your head around this whole IOT, industrial IOT, there's just so many segments, it's so fragment that, and it's-- >> Yeah. >> It's enormous, it's almost impossible to size, I mean it's trillion dollars, this whole economy of its own. What are your takeaways on just that whole space? >> You know, a lot of what I focus on, too, when I'm doing everything from NBC or NPR and stuff like that is on the consumer impact. So I'm looking at the consumer side but I'm also an entrepreneur, so I'm thinking about what's happening on the business side. And when I see on both ends, you're absolutely right. The field is enormous when you really think about it. Whether you want to look at how we can replace old school manufacturing and how this is going to transfer... That's a whole sector just in it of itself. We haven't even now talked about, you know, AI for children or for (incoherent) or for the health and wellness sector, whole other sector that's looking at IOT and the power of that. I mean, being able to look at.. I was just in one of the other, in the deluxe lounge and I was checking out one of our fun games. It's called Sphero. It's a consumer game, but its a small ball that you control through VR and AR on your phone, but you can actually use the phone to program things in real time to make it respond in real time. So all of these things together, to me, start to paint this large ecosystem because now you have kids that are growing up using devices and using technologies that we're just starting to get our hands on but this is how they're solving problems and thinking about things already. So when this economy and this ecosystem starts to mature, you're going to have a ready-made audience that's already been exposed to 90% of this. >> Well, and Stu I wonder if you could chime into it, it makes me think that these worlds, even though consumer and industrial are so seemingly different, it seems like parts of them, anyway, adjacencies are coming together. >> Absolutely. And there's always going to be that... There's always going to be... Look, when I talk about innovation and whether you look at Dr. Hill, who's speaking here today, Dr. Linda Hill from Harvard and others, when I look at it, she calls it creative abrasion, like the difference between brainstorming and actually utilizing new ideas to create new concepts. I call it hybrid design. Normally, it's taking something that you know exists and then taking two things that don't seem to go together-- that's normally where you find creation. I don't like to say disruption, I like to say creation. >> Yeah, actually there's a good friend of mine that I work with and I worked at EMC, he called it venn diagram innovation. >> Oh, that's it! That's it! >> I take a few things and I put it together and we were talking about the consumer side-- >> Yeah! >> We've looked so many technologies, you get the scale usually from the consumer. When we look at things like flash in all of our devices-- >> That's right. >> Really enabled the enterprise to do things. The VR and AR is something that we've actually got some folks on the team that are heavy gamers that they're the ones that I go to when I want to learn, "Okay, what's the cutting-edge--" >> 'Cause they've already been in it. That's right. >> They're on their Steam, they're doing everything. >> That's right. >> They sort everything out. You leverage a lot of technology in how you really get your message out there. Talk a little about how you think of media these days. >> Oh, it's completely different. I mean, when we're looking at how media is even utilized in these new technologies, you know, our talk show is a talk show that we shoot in Nasdaq Studios, so it's shot in New York City, it's called the "Never Settle Show", it's a weekly one-hour live stream talk show, so we get and appreciate what you have to go through. These guys are pros by the way. (Dave and Stu laugh) Yeah, they're pros 'cause this is not easy to do. >> It's a minor miracle, right? Every time. >> (laughs) It's not easy to do at all. And so a lot of kudos to you and the team behind the scenes that make that happen. >> Thank you. >> With that being said, it's a great time if you have an expertise or if you have content to share especially in a live scenario because now you can start to really utilize other technologies within that. For example, we kind of claim ourselves to be one of the most interactive talk shows out there. What we do in our show is we're using other technologies, bringing them together to create real time conversations. So how that practically plays out is I'll have a guest on the show, we'll be talking, I'll put up a screen of three options and people can vote right then and there while they're watching in stream and you'll see which of what they want me to do next. I'll say something like, "Which thing is most appealing... Which topic do you want us to talk about next?" And they'll actually vote in real time and then the control room in everyone doesn't know what the answer's going to be, but we're all waiting for the answer and then when the popular vote comes out, few seconds later, we scramble and adjust to that. That's real time television, giving viewers what they really want in real time, using different technologies. So that's this hybrid approach. We can be a standard show and just do... talk and have that format, or we could really be looking at things that we could integrate in other technologies that would enhance the viewing experience and make it much more productive. >> Well you're actually affecting the, you call it "creation" as supposed to "disruption" of this new media industry, I mean, you've seen... I saw a stat the other day that cost the New York Times 200 million dollars to run a news desk. (Mario laughs) You're seeing, you know, billionaires buy up, you know, the Boston Globe, the Washington Post-- >> Yes, that's right. >> The industry is transforming in a huge way. You're seeing, you know, Facebook backlash with fake news. What's your senses as to what's going on in the media business? Obviously you're "creating", "disrupting", whatever you like to call it, sure. What do you see is the future of the media business? >> Well, I mean I think it's going to become something where the end reader, the end viewer has more control. Ultimately, that's... the problem with most systems and most structures is when people want to hold the control and not share because whether that's ego, whether they're worried about intellectual property loss, or whether they really think that the market's going to swallow them up.... Now I'm not saying, obviously you give away all your secret sauce, but what I am saying is when you start thinking from that small limiting position, you've already lost the game. And so what I think is going to happen, yes, you have big people buying a lot of media and there's a lot of discussion in politics about whether or not, you know, billionaires buying media are problems and what that's going to mean in terms of the message that's going to be reported to people, that's going to always be an issue, but I think even with that, that's why it's even more empowering that the individuals are taking more control over their own narrative. And that's why I think you've seen social media, Instagram video, Instagram talking about going to sixty minutes in it's video, not just a minute, for publishers, I think the power's now more in the person's hand to really pick and choose and so they vote with their eyeballs, they vote with their engagement, they vote with their interactivity. And so I think no matter what happens on the big end, people are going to be able to create and get the stories that they want to be able to get. >> Well we're big believers of that, Stu, and we're decentralized media and we really believe that there's got to be an incentive system to put the power back in the hands of the users to control their data. >> This is how it works. >> Right? I mean... >> Yeah. And, Mario, so we've talked about the tech and your show "Never Settle" actually won an Emmy for the interactivity nature of it? >> Yeah. It did. >> But talk to the people and passion, how that fits into "Never Settle". >> Yeah, so it's a blending. So what we try to do on our show is blend how you can leverage technology to move forward on your passion. But you can't use technology to move forward on your passion if you don't know what your passion is. So a lot of our discussions really work more around, "how do we get you to think differently"? How do we, you know... our vision for our company is to motivate people across the globe to never settle. How we do that through our mission is that we inspire the humans spirit, we want to teach lessons that matter and we want to uncover new perspectives. What that means, tangibly, is that when you watch our show, you should be having notes. You should be, like... our show is meant for you to want to take notes so that you actually know the process. What people are missing for the most part today is they see how to maybe start something or they see how someone else did and how they succeeded or how they failed, but they don't get the in between, the recipe. And so the more we can be sharing about the process about someone's success or, even better, someone's failure, 'cause that's where you learn more and you get more uncomfortable, makes you more comfortable, it's a blending of those two things of getting your mental position and getting you stronger mentally and building up your resilience so that you can actually go find your purpose, be happier in your life, but then use technology to accelerate. Like, that's the, as Jim put, like, you know, put gasoline and make it fast or make it go quicker. And so I think the blending of the two, again, a hybrid... Even how we approach our content is that. So we'll have everyone from tech luminaries on the show but also we'll just have everyday folks that have really proven success, like these people deserve attention but they're not maybe, quote on quote, big-names. >> And this idea of combinatorial innovation, you certainly heard Jim Heppelmann talking about that today with machines that are powerful and computers that are fast and can do things repetitively and then humans, which are creative. I like that theme. >> You can't do it any other way, I mean, this is why, you know, it's determination and direction. Your team needs to be determined but also have the direction. You need to have what I call the three P's. You need to have your passion in place. Like, what are you ultimately passionate about as a team? As an organization? What are you driving towards? What's your "why"? And then once you have that, then you can start to really push through on the perseverance. You're going to bump your head. You're going to fail fast. A great tech term, I love flipping that tech term because we learn in programming to fail to quick so that we can find the bugs fast and correct our course really quick. So that persistence happens. And then, the hardest part is you got to have some patience. Because then you have to kind of sit back. Let the market also play. Let the universe come around. Sometimes we're ahead. Sometimes we're behind. But we need to have a little bit of that patience to have some reflection to see where we are, so I think, you know, now is really just a great time for a lot of people that are looking to really figure out where they can make their moves... the opportunities that keep creating themselves in IOT are endless. I don't care if you're talking from someone that's a graphic designer all the way up to an engineer or a coder, to marketing and sales, like there's so many different facets of this ecosystem and opportunity now. >> I love that, Mario. Patient, passion, persistence, patience-- >> Yes. >> The three P's kind of start with why, the old-- >> Yeah. Simon Sinek. That's right. >> People don't buy what you do. They buy why you do it. >> That's right. >> Break stuff. >> (laughs) Love that. Break stuff. >> And don't give up. Don't give up. (Mario laughs) >> No, it's, you know... it's because what we're trying to do, if you really wanted to have action, you want to take complex things and you want to pull them together in a hybrid scenario and start to bang upon them. As opposed to the other idea of planning, planning, planning, planning, you actually want to practice, practice, practice, practice. That's what's going to get you there fast. So I just think that with a lot of the technologies it can be overwhelming to people 'cause they start to hear so much so that's why I say it comes back to, "What's your purpose?" If you can stay focused on why you're doing what it is you're doing, you'll know which technologies to pay more attention to. You'll know where your curiosity should veer more into. You'll study the things that you need to really study. And then you'll accelerate faster because you've identified your niche. It's like having a, you know, an Italian restaurant. You're not just, you know... somebody's going to come by and present to you... Some sales rep is going to come by and present to you, like, beer that's not a fit for like Italian restaurant, you know, like, I know that's not for me instantly. As opposed to being pulled in so many directions, which is what the danger of all this technology can do, is it can overwhelm us and pull us into so many directions that we want to go and pursue the hottest new trend or the hot thing. If we come back to our "why", we're always going to be secure. >> That's a great point, I mean there are an infinite opportunities of purposes in this world. >> Yes. >> It's sometimes hard to get a grasp on things and really focus. But you're seeing some of this successful projects really do start with a main spring and a focus and a purpose. >> Yeah. >> And a mission. >> It does. I mean, that's where it all becomes. I mean, it has to start there in order to get other people on board with your dream, whether you're the leader of the organization or the leader of a project. And, you know, I just feel that for many people, they are at an age where they have been in this business for quite some time. They've seen a lot of things evolve. Accepting change and, like Jim had said today, preparing to change is one of the best keys of information that you can take away because we all have the skill, the talent, the ability, it's just a matter or not, are we willing to adjust or are we... do we want to do status quo. >> Awesome. Hey, you're a clear thinker, articulate, you look great. Thanks so much for coming to theCUBE. >> (laughs) Aw man, Dave and Stu, it's been a pleasure. Thank you so much for having me on theCUBE. >> Our pleasure. >> This has been awesome. >> Alright, keep it right there, buddy, we'll be back from LiveWorx with our next guest right after this short break. You're watching theCUBE. We'll be right back.