>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> In just over 10 years, CrowdStrike has become a leading independent security firm with more than 2 billion in annual recurring revenue, nearly 60% ARR growth, and approximate $40 billion market capitalization, very high retention rates, low churn, and a path to 5 billion in revenue by mid decade. The company has joined Palo Alto Networks as a gold standard pure play cyber security firm. It has achieved this lofty status with an architecture that goes beyond a point product. With outstanding go to market and financial execution, some sharp acquisitions and an ever increasing total available market. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this "Breaking Analysis" and ahead of Falcon, Fal.Con, CrowdStrike's user conference, we take a deeper look into CrowdStrike, its performance, its platform, and survey data from our partner ETR. Now, the general consensus is that spending on Cyber is non-discretionary and is held up better than other technology sectors. While this is generally true, as this data shows, it's nuanced. Let's explore this a bit. First, this is a year-to-date chart of the stock performance of CrowdStrike relative to Palo Alto, the BUG ETF, which is a Cyber index, the NASDAQ and SentinelOne, a relatively new entrant to the IPO public markets. Now, as you can see the security sector as evidenced by the orange line, that Cyber ETF, is holding up better than the overall NASDAQ which is off 28% year-to-date. Palo Alto has held up incredibly well, the best, being off only around 4% year-to-date. Whereas CrowdStrike is off in the double digits this year. But up as we talked about in one of our last "Breaking Analysis" on Cyber, up from its lows this past May. Now, CrowdStrike had a very nice beat and raise on August 30th. But the stop didn't respond well initially. We asked "Breaking Analysis" contributor, Chip Simonton for his technical take and he stated that CrowdStrike has bounced around for the last three months in its current range. He said that Cyber stocks have held up better than the rest of the market, as we're showing. And now might be a good time to take a shot but he is cautious. FedEx had a warning today of a global recession and that's obvious case for a concern. You know, maybe some of these quality Cyber stocks like Palo Alto and CrowdStrike and Zscaler will outperform in a recession, but that play is not for the faint of heart. In fact, it's feeling like a longer, more drawn out tech lash than many had hoped. Perhaps as much as 12 to 18 months of bouncing around with sellers still in control, is generally the sentiment from Simonton. So in terms of Cyber spending being non-discretionary, we'd say it's less discretionary than other it sectors but the CISO still does not have an open wallet, as we've reported before. We've seen that spending momentum has decelerated in all sectors throughout the year. This is an across the board trend. Now, independent of the stock price, George Kurtz, CEO of CrowdStrike, he's running a marathon, not a sprint. And this company is running at a nice pace despite tough macro headwinds. The company is free cash flow positive and is in the black, or a non-GAAP operating profit basis and yet it's growing ARR at nearly 60%. Frank Slootman uses the term inherent profitability, meaning that the company could drive more profits if it wanted to dial down expenses especially in go to market costs. But that would be a mistake for a company like CrowdStrike, in our opinion. While it has an impressive nearly 20,000 customers, there are hundreds of thousands of customers that CrowdStrike could penetrate. So like Snowflake and Slootman, Kurtz is not taking its foot off the gas. Now, the fundamental strength of CrowdStrike and its secret sauce is its architecture and platform, in our view, so let's take a deeper look. CrowdStrike believes that the unstoppable breach is a myth. Now, CISOs don't agree with that because they assume they're going to get breached, but that's CrowdStrike's point of view, so lofty vision. CrowdStrike's mission is to consolidate the patchwork of solutions by introducing modules that go beyond point products. CrowdStrike has more than 20 modules, I think 22, that span a range of capabilities as shown in this table. Now, there are a few critical aspects of the CrowdStrike architecture that bear mentioning. First is the lightweight agent, that is fundamental. You know, we're used to thinking that agentless is good and agent is bad, but in this case, a powerful but small, slim and easy to install but unobtrusive agent has its advantages because it supports multiple CrowdStrike modules. The second point is CrowdStrike from the beginning has been dogmatic about getting all the telemetry data into the cloud. It sort of shunned doing bespoke on prem so that all the data could be analyzed. So the more agents that CrowdStrike installs around the world, the more data it has access to and the better its intelligence. Few companies have access to more data, perhaps Microsoft given it scale and size is an exception in that endpoint space. CrowdStrike has developed a purpose-built threat graph and analytics platform that allows it to quickly ingest in near real time key telemetry data and detect not only known malware, that's pretty straightforward, pretty much anybody could do that. But using machine intelligence, it can also detect unknown malware and other potentially malicious behavior using indicators of attack, IOC, or IOAs. Humio is shown here as a company that CrowdStrike bought for around 400 million in early 2020, early 2021. It's the company's Splunk killer and will serve as an observability platform. It's really starting to take off, that's a great market for them to go after. CrowdStrike, to try to put it into sort of a summary, uses a three pronged approach. First is it's next generation anti-virus, meaning it's SaaS base. SAS based solution that can do fast lookups to telemetry data and that data lives in the cloud. And this leverages cloud strikes proprietary threat graph. Now, the second is endpoint detection and response. CrowdStrike sends all endpoint activity to the cloud and can process the data in real time. CrowdStrike EDR allows you to search data history and its partners with threat intelligent platforms who push the data into CrowdStrike, the CrowdStrike cloud. This increases CloudStrike's observation space. It also has containment capabilities in EDR to fence off compromised system. Now, the third leg of the stool is CrowdStrike's world class manage hunting approach. Like many firms, CrowdStrike has a crack team of experts that is looking at the data, but CrowdStrike's advantage is the amount of data, that observation space that we just talked about, and near real time capabilities of the architecture thanks to that proprietary database that they've developed. And all this is built in the cloud and so it enables global scale. And of course, agility. Now, let's dig into some of the survey data and take a look at what ETR respondents are saying about the spending momentum for CrowdStrike in context with its peers. Here's a very recent dataset, the October preliminary data from the October dataset in ETR's survey. Eric Bradley shared with us, ETR's head of strategy, and he runs the round tables, he's a frequent "Breaking Analysis" contributor. This is an XY graph with Netcore or spending momentum on the vertical axis and the overlap or pervasiveness in the survey on the horizontal axis. That dotted red line at 40% indicates an elevated level of spending velocity. Anything above that, we consider really impressive. Note the CrowdStrike progression since the pandemic started. The two notable points are one, that CrowdStrike has remained consistently above that 40% mark and two, it has made notable progress to the right. You can see that sort of squiggly line consistently increasing its share with one little anomaly there in the early days of over a two-year period. The other call out here is Microsoft in the upper-right. We circled Microsoft as usual. Microsoft messes up the data because it's such a dominant player and has referenced earlier as a massive scale and very quality telemetry from its endpoints. Unlike AWS, Microsoft is a direct competitor of CrowdStrike's. Nonetheless, the sector remains very strong with lots of players. Cyber is a large and expanding TAM with too many point tools that CrowdStrike is well positioned to consolidate, in our view. Now, here's a more narrow view of that same XY graph. What it does is it takes out Microsoft to kind of normalize the data a bit and it compares a number of firms that specialize in endpoint, along with CrowdStrike such as Tanium which also has a lightweight agent, by the way, and appears to be doing pretty well. SentinelOne did a relatively recent IPO, took off, stock hasn't done as well since, as you saw earlier. Carbon Black which VMware bought for around $2 billion and Cylance which is the Blackberry pivot. Now, we've also for context included Palo Alto and Cisco because they are major players with the big presence in security and they've got solutions that compete with CrowdStrike. But you can see how CrowdStrike looms large with a higher net score than these others. Although Palo Alto is very impressive, as is Cisco, steady. But Palo Alto also, sorry, CrowdStrike also has a very steady posture instead of just looming on that X axis. Let's now take a look at XDR, extended detection and response. XDR is kind of this bit of a buzzword but CrowdStrike seems to be taking the mantle and trying to sort of own the category and define it, in our view. It's a natural evolution of endpoint detection and response, EDR. In a recent ETR Roundtable hosted by our colleague, Eric Bradley, the sentiment among several CIOs is that existing SIEM, security information and event management platforms are inadequate and some see XDR as a replacement for, or at least a strong compliment to SIEM. CISOs want a single view of their data. Hmm, you haven't heard that before. They want help prioritizing potentially high impact breaches and they want to automate the low level stuff because the problem is sometimes too much information becomes information overload and you can't prioritize. So they want to consolidate platforms. They want better co consistency. They have too many dashboards, too many stove pipes. They have difficulty scaling and they have inconsistent telemetry data. As one CISO said, it's a call out here. "If the regulatory requirement isn't there, I absolutely would get rid of my SIEM." So CrowdStrike, we feel, is in a good position to continue to gain, share and disrupt this space. And that's what Dave Nicholson and I will be looking for next week when theCUBE is at Fal.Con, CrowdStrike's user conference. We'll be there for two days at the area in Vegas. In addition to CrowdStrike CEO, we'll hear from government cyber experts. We always hear that at security conferences and the CEO of Mandiant. Google just the other day closed its $5 billion plus acquisition of Mandiant, which is a threat intelligence expert and MSSP. I'm going to hear a lot about MSSPs by the way. CrowdStrike is a growing MSSP base. We think that's a really interesting sector because many companies don't have a SOC. As many as 50% of companies in the United States don't have a security operations center. So they need help, that's where MSPs come in. At the conference, there'll be a real focus on the Falcon platform. And we expect CrowdStrike to educate the audience on its multiple modules and how to take advantage of the capabilities beyond endpoint. And we'll also be watching for the ecosystem conversations. We saw this at reinforced, for example, where CrowdStrike and Okta were presenting together to show how these companies products compliment each other in the marketplace. Sometimes it gets confusing when you hear that CrowdStrike has an identity product. Okta, of course, is the identity specialist. So we'll be helping extract that signal from the noise. Because a generational company must have a strong ecosystem. CrowdStrike is evolving and our belief is that it has some work to do to create a stronger partner flywheel, and we're eager to dig into that next week. So if you're at the event, please do stop by theCUBE, say hello to Dave Nicholson and myself. Okay, we're going to leave it there today. Many thanks to Chip Simonton and Eric Bradley for their input and contributions to today's episode. Thanks to Alex Myerson, who does production, he also manages our podcast, Ken Schiffman as well, in our Boston studios, Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and our newsletters, and Rob Hof is our editor in chief over at siliconangle.com. He does some wonderful editing and I really appreciate that. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen, just search "Breaking Analysis" Podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com and you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me @DVellante or comment on our LinkedIn post. 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)

(energetic electronic music) >> Hi, I'm Stu Miniman and welcome to a special Cube interview here at the Schneider Electric offices in Boston, Massachusetts. Happy to welcome to the program a first-time guest, Hervé Coureil, who is the Chief Digital Officer at Schneider Electric. Thank you so much for having us-- >> Oh, thanks for having me. >> It's a little rainy, but that's what we can expect in Boston-- >> Don't say that. >> But, lovely view. Thanks so much. >> Thank you. >> Great, so first of all, give us a little bit about your background. You're the Chief Digital Officer today, we love talkin' to the CDOs, you've been a CIO, you've been a CFO, and we'll definitely get into some of the organizational dynamics as to who reports to whom and who owns what and the like. >> Sure, so, you know, in the day, I started in finance, actually, I did a lot of work in M&A. After a while, we are quite a pretty large company called APC and I became the CFO, and really, working essentially on post-modular integration, right? So how do we put all those pieces together? And when you do that, you quickly realize that actually technology is on the critical path all the time, so you know, I developed quite a keen interest at that time for technology, and that's when Schneider decided, really, to change its setup, to evolve its organization with a program called One Schneider. We created the CFO position and that's where, basically, I took the helm as the CIO for Schneider Electric. And you know, over time, when digital became a thing, it was not just about, you know, how you digitize the company, it was also how you create a digital business, so that's how we created Schneider Digital and I became the CDO. So all of this sounds like super logical right now, of course it was more complicated than that. But that's a view of the whole arc of the story. >> Yeah, lots of politics, we understand, organizations, large M&As, we understand that there's challenges, things to work through. If you could, for our audience, just frame Schneider Electric. I actually, you know, disclaimer, I worked for American Power Conversion way back longer than I'd like to even admit, but you know, uninterrupted power supplies, they really helped create a market, and had some excellent technology, strong engineering background, which is what led me to that company, but Schneider Electric today, of course, much bigger than just APC, give us a little bit of a frame. >> So, Schneider Electric is a pretty large global corporation, I think we employ something like 140,000 people, so pretty large multi-billion company. We basically are in the business of energy management and industry automation, we are specialists of that. Our core value proposition is really bringing efficiency and sustainability to our customer. We do that in a number of areas, whether it's buildings, whether it's, you know, large infrastructures, data centers, factory floors, and industry all processes, but sort of a core common thread, if you will, is how you bring efficiency, sustainability to our customers. >> Great, you talked a little bit about your background as a CFO was to help with the merger. Bring us up to what is your role as a Chief Data Officer, what is the mandate you have? We're going to spend some time unpacking digital transformation. We always say the difference between a company before and after that digital transformation is, you know, data is so important, you must be data driven, you must understand it, and therefore often there is a CDO involved. So, what led to this role? And what is that specific mandate that you have? >> Sure, so, you know, I did mention just before that, you know, we had the concept of efficiency, right? We try really, we have a value prop about, you know, safety, reliability that over time evolves towards efficiency and sustainability. And in order to provide efficiency, whether it's in a building, whether it's an industry, or building a process, what needs to happen is not just with hardware, right? You need to be able to extract data from products, from systems, you need to be able to make sense of that data, to analyze it and then to act on it, right? To sort of close the loop from data to insight, insights to action, so that's where for us, the digital transformation was not just about digitizing ourselves, but it was also about augmenting the value proposition that we have for our customers, augmenting what we can offer our customer base. We offer services that could push the boundaries of, you know, efficiency and sustainability and then we're all about adding an information component, right? A data component on top of, you know, the best hardware and software. So that's sort of of the evolution and you were speaking about the mandate. So the mandate is really around four things. First is really, is of a digital business so how we create digital offers that are going to augment to complement our existing offers, making, you know, taking advantage of cloud, taking advantage of analytics, AIs, and providing, you know, predictive maintenance, providing optimization services, right? That can augment our value prop. It's also about bringing the ecosystem of partners that can really reinforce those value props for those digital affairs. So it's really first about that digital business, then it's about digitizing our sales and it's three things. It's first how we engage customers, so customers and partners who're thinking about what's our digital footprint? How we create basically a digital experience for our customers and partners that is even better than the one we're having in the physical world. Then it's about operation, so our backend systems, you know, making sure that we have a backend system that scales. And the last mandate is security. >> Okay, it's a pretty broad mandate. A lot of things going on, 140,000 people working for Schneider, not to mention you talked about your customers, your partners, all of these things. >> Hervé: Absolutely. >> You know, what's the scope of this, how many years ago did this start? Is there a phased rollout that you're looking, is there, you know, was there just a budget assigned to it? Bring us a little bit as to how this all rolls out. >> So, sure, a couple of things. I would say, so we started three years ago, really, with digital mandate. Only that started well before because actually, you know, if you're in the business of industrial automation, you haven't waited the advent of IOT to connect machines to a supervisor regulator to controls, etc. Now what happened is, of course, the power of a cloud, the power of analytics, and you could take things even further. So really three years ago was when we started thinking about Schneider Digital, and the way we thought about it is we didn't want it to be something totally on the side of the business, so it's not a separate P&L, it's not, you know, a separate organization, we're serving the businesses, we're augmenting the businesses, we're providing them with transversal capabilities, we're providing our businesses with digital services platform-level component that they can reuse, etc. So that they can go faster in addressing their customers. And it was critical for us to find that sort of appropriate distance, if you will, because you need to incubate a digital business, but at the same time, if it just happens on the side, you never augment the core. And so you kind of lose, right? The main benefit out of it. >> Yeah, it's nice that you have the background of also being a CIO. Everything that I'm hearing you talking about is what we hear from many leading companies out there, that it's, right, it's not just doing what the business asks, it's helping to often create new products or, you know, in many cases, even, you know, it's innovation helping to drive the business. I want to, you mentioned at the end of one of your last pieces, talked about security. That's something critical when you're talking about data, and in your CDO role, tell us a little bit about the security of how that's involved in this total solution. >> Sure, so far as you know, it's of course became, you know, more and more important over time. And we're really here to rethink how we're approaching security, right? Going away from this idea of defending the perimeter, moving to concepts much more like a zero trust approach because the world has changed with employees that like to work from, you know, their taxis and planes, and we had really to rethink the posture, right?, of Schneider Electric, and also how we work with customers, and we can help, how we can help our own customers improving the cybersecurity of their building or industrial operations, right? So we have, we see it as a pretty broad mandate, actually, quite end-to-end, it's not just about, you know, building thick walls, I think the times of perimeter defense are long gone, but it's really about thinking about it as a full cycle from identification to recovery and putting a risk-based approach and some, you know, continuous improvement approach into it. A lot of discipline, basically. >> All right, and Hervé, are there some partners that were important in this digital transformation? >> So overall or specific in security? >> Both, yeah. >> So yes, I mean, we have big partners, and you know, you wouldn't, you could guess, right? I mean, of course you know we are working a lot with Amazon, we're working a lot with Microsoft, we're working a lot with Salesforce, on the system integration side, you know, we work with Cap Gemini, with Accenture, so we have, of course, a bunch of yeah, of traditional partners, you know, you would expect. I mean, we try to be more and more very considerate about what we want to do ourselves and when we basically, you know, delegate some functional points to partners. And then we also created an ecosystem of partners around security and Schneider is a very partner-centric company because we actually work with through partners most of the time. So, you know, working as an ecosystem is actually something that's pretty natural to us, we just had to learn how to do it in the digital age. >> Yeah, that's great, a company of your size, right? It's not only the suppliers there, but building that ecosystem, yeah. Anything more on the security side that you want to call out, regarding that journey? >> So, you know, we've been working, we've developed a lot. I mean, we felt that security was, it takes a village, right? And the ecosystem approach was even more important, so we've been working with Zscaler on a network-level security, we've been working with IBM and Deloitte, on other areas, we've been working with Cylance as well, I mean, I wouldn't, there's a long list, right? But we've tried to build an ecosystem both at a surface level and at a solution level 'cause the problem often with security is that, you know, you can have a lot of point solutions that would solve a very narrow problem, but it's really, you know, what really makes a difference is your ability to integrate, is your ability to have a pane of glass where you can figure out correlations and then pretty quickly take action, so it's striking that balance between adding solution that would add you a new source of information, you understanding of your context with the ability to act on this information. >> Yeah, and Hervé, what lessons have you learned going through this? You talked about the balance between what you do in-house versus what you look to outside, that's a general trend we've seen in cloud for the last 10 years or more, so, you know, looking back at what you've done so far in three years, any advice that you'd give to your peers? >> Probably three things. So the first thing you mentioned is the ecosystem, right? Is that it's not us versus them, it's how you embark an ecosystem of partners and how you bring some logic in that ecosystem. So that's really key. The second thing is really scale. I think I always say that in digital, it's always super easy, you know, to come with the latest shiny object, do a proof of concept, etc. But usually, that doesn't matter. The key sauce, the secret sauce is how you scale. Often and in particular in today's world, people tend to have a misconception of scale, that this is just size. Actually, very often in, you know, in digital, scale is about replicability, it's how easy can you replicate? Which is a slightly different concept when you think about it. But thinking scale first, I mean, you know, is so critical to us. And the third point would be performance management, actually, we've spent a lot of time defining, or maybe that's my roots as a finance person a long time ago, but it's, you know, what does success mean, right? What are the metrics of success? We'll call them the true north. What true norths are we pursuing? And how do we allocate resource? Because at the end of the day, you'll only scale if you're able to allocate resource, so if you want to have a sophisticated digital organization, you need to start by having a sophisticated resource allocation process. >> Yeah, how about the outcomes? You know, what if ultimately your end user customers, what do they see out of this digital transformation? And also would love if there's any commentary on the employees, we understand, you know, getting them involved in training and the like can be challenging, but you know, ultimately, you know, how does digital impact both your external and internal customers? >> Sure, so, let me unpack that, right? In terms of true north or outcomes, the key thing we look at first is how we create the digital business, on how much are we creating adoption, right? With our customers. So we really track, you know, how many new things we and our ecosystem, how much more value are we creating to our customers? Are those customers adopting those new value points? Those new solutions? Those new ideas? So, and of course, you know, how much are we growing behind that, etc.? But it's really this idea of value and adoption to start with. When we look at the engagement, the customer side, we look at the customer satisfaction in the physical world and we compare it with the customer satisfaction in the digital world. And we want the two to be at par. When it comes to the backend, we look at how much we're simplifying that backend, so we're tracking technical depth and so forth. And then on security, we look at external scoring so that we always, you know, keep ourselves (laughs) right next to the external assessment and how we're doing. So that's basically, you know, how we look at the four dimensions that I was mentioning at the beginning. To answer the second part of your question, which was more about employees, I mean, it's a huge effort, of course, you know, creating the organization, a lot of recruitments, a lot of training, we've been working a lot on, you know, providing you with a digital citizenship course on up to very technical course we found completely our approach to learning, and there are many, many aspects of the employee experience that we've been working on, I mean, providing mobility, providing, you know, on finding that balance, right? Between security and enabling the new world of work where people are going to work on the go and offering them a much better level of access basically to the corporate resources, mobile, and so forth. This has been a massive transformation over a year. >> Hervé, the last thing I'd like to ask you, Just, you know, the changing dynamics of organizations today, as we started out talking, you know, CDO is still a relatively new role out there. The role of the CIO has changed an awful lot, you know, over the length of our careers, so, you know, what are you seeing in those dynamics? You've worn both of those hats and you know, where do you see things going and any feedback you'd give to the industry to make the lives easier of the CDOs and CIOs out there? >> Well, I think it's, you know, I would say I've seen the roles held very differently from an industry to another. So, you know, it's probably hard to replicate from, you know, the energy management and industrial automation industry to others, but in an industry like ours, where the products are becoming digital because basically, you know, you want to create data in the real world, you want to be able to process that data, create insights from that data, and then you want to be able to act in the real world based on those data. You really need to look at those two aspects, and there was a great, actually, paper from MIT a while ago about digitized on digital, so really, I really like to say digital is really about creating this digital business, you know? Real world data, transforming this real world data in insights and action and then acting in the real world, while CIO is mostly being about how you are digitizing the company, right? So, the employee experience, the customer experience, the partner experience, having transforming your backend into a machine that scales, and both equally share that last mandate that's even a broader mandate, at the level of the enterprise that goes with security. So that's how I would roughly, if you will, you know, define the space. >> Hervé Coureil, thank you so much for sharing your experiences, it's been a pleasure talking with you. >> Hervé: Thanks for having me. >> All right, I'm Stu Miniman, we're here at Schneider Electric's office in Boston, Massachusetts, and as always, thanks for watchin' theCUBE. (energetic electronic music)

>> Narrator: New York City, it's the Cube covering CyberConnect 2017 brought to you by Centrify and the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology. >> Welcome back, everyone. This is the Cube's live coverage in New York City's Grand Hyatt Ballroom for CyberConnect 2017 presented by Centrify. I'm John Furrier, the co-host of the Cube with my co-host this week is Dave Vellante, my partner and co-founder and co-CEO with me in SiliconAngle Media in the Cube. Our next guest is James Scott who is the co-founder and senior fellow at ICIT. Welcome to the Cube. >> Thanks for having me. >> You guys are putting on this event, really putting the content together. Centrify, just so everyone knows, is underwriting the event but this is not a Centrify event. You guys are the key content partner, developing the content agenda. It's been phenomenal. It's an inaugural event so it's the first of its kind bringing in industry, government, and practitioners all together, kind of up leveling from the normal and good events like Black Hat and other events like RSA which go into deep dives. Here it's a little bit different. Explain. >> Yeah, it is. We're growing. We're a newer think tank. We're less than five years old. The objective is to stay smaller. We have organizations, like Centrify, that came out of nowhere in D.C. so we deal, most of what we've done up until now has been purely federal and on the Hill so what I do, I work in the intelligence community. I specialize in social engineering and then I advise in the Senate for the most part, some in the House. We're able to take these organizations into the Pentagon or wherever and when we get a good read on them and when senators are like, "hey, can you bring them back in to brief us?" That's when we know we have a winner so we started really creating a relationship with Tom Kemp, who's the CEO and founder over there, and Greg Cranley, who heads the federal division. They're aggressively trying to be different as opposed to trying to be like everyone else, which makes it easy. If someone wants to do something, they have to be a fellow for us to do it, but if they want to do it, just like if they want to commission a paper, we just basically say, "okay, you can pay for it but we run it." Centrify has just been excellent. >> They get the community model. They get the relationship that you have with your constituents in the community. Trust matters, so you guys are happy to do this but more importantly, the content. You're held to a standard in your community. This is new, not to go in a different direction for a second but this is what the community marketing model is. Stay true to your audience and trust. You're relied upon so that's some balance that you guys have to do. >> The thing is we deal with cylance and others. Cylance, for example, was the first to introduce machine learning artificial intelligence to get passed that mutating hash for endpoint security. They fit in really well in the intelligence community. The great thing about working with Centrify is they let us take the lead and they're very flexible and we just make sure they come out on top each time. The content, it's very content driven. In D.C., we have at our cocktail receptions, they're CIA, NSA, DARPA, NASA. >> You guys are the poster child of be big, think small. >> Exactly. Intimate. >> You say Centrify is doing things differently. They're not falling in line like a lemming. What do you mean by that? What is everybody doing that these guys are doing differently? >> I think in the federal space, I think commercial too, but you have to be willing to take a big risk to be different so you have to be willing to pay a premium. If people work with us, they know they're going to pay a premium but we make sure they come out on top. What they do is, they'll tell us, Centrify will be like, "look, we're going to put x amount of dollars into a lunch. "Here are the types of pedigree individuals "that we need there." Maybe they're not executives. Maybe they're the actual practitioners at DHS or whatever. The one thing that they do different is they're aggressively trying to deviate from the prototype. That's what I mean. >> Like a vendor trying to sell stuff. >> Yeah and the thing is, that's why when someone goes to a Centrify event, I don't work for Centrify (mumbles). That's how they're able to attract. If you see, we have General Alexander. We've got major players here because of the content, because it's been different and then the other players want to be on the stage with other players, you know what I mean. It almost becomes a competition for "hey, I was asked to come to an ICIT thing" you know, that sort of thing. That's what I mean. >> It's reputation. You guys have a reputation and you stay true to that. That's what I was saying. To me, I think this is the future of how things get done. When you have a community model, you're held to a standard with your community. If you cross the line on that standard, you head fake your community, that's the algorithm that brings you a balance so you bring good stuff to the table and you vet everyone else on the other side so it's just more of a collaboration, if you will. >> The themes here, what you'll see is within critical infrastructure, we try to gear this a little more towards the financial sector. We brought, from Aetna, he set up the FS ISAC. Now he's with the health sector ISAC. For this particular geography in New York, we're trying to have it focus more around health sector and financial critical infrastructure. You'll see that. >> Alright, James, I've got to ask you. You're a senior fellow. You're on the front lines with a great Rolodex, great relationships in D.C., and you're adivising and leaned upon by people making policy, looking at the world and the general layout in which, the reality is shit's happening differently now so the world's got to change. Take us through a day in the life of some of the things you guys are seeing and what's the outlook? I mean, it's like a perfect storm of chaos, yet opportunity. >> It really depends. Each federal agency, we look at it from a Hill perspective, it comes down to really educating them. When I'm in advising in the House, I know I'm going to be working with a different policy pedigree than a Senate committee policy expert, you know what I mean. You have to gauge the conversation depending on how new the office is, House, Senate, are they minority side, and then what we try to do is bring the issues that the private sector is having while simultaneously hitting the issues that the federal agency space is. Usually, we'll have a needs list from the CSWEP at the different federal agencies for a particular topic like the Chinese APTs or the Russian APT. What we'll do is, we'll break down what the issue is. With Russia, for example, it's a combination of two types of exploits that are happening. You have the technical exploit, the malicious payload and vulnerability in a critical infrastructure network and then profiling those actors. We also have another problem, the influence operations, which is why we started the Center for Cyber Influence Operations Studies. We've been asked repeatedly since the elections last year by the intelligence community to tell us, explain this new propaganda. The interesting thing is the synergies between the two sides are exploiting and weaponizing the same vectors. While on the technical side, you're exploiting a vulnerability in a network with a technical exploit, with a payload, a compiled payload with a bunch of tools. On the influence operations side, they're weaponizing the same social media platforms that you would use to distribute a payload here but only the... >> Contest payload. Either way you have critical infrastructure. The payload being content, fake content or whatever content, has an underpinning that gamification call it virality, network effect and user psychology around they don't really open up the Facebook post, they just read the headline and picture. There's a dissonance campaign, or whatever they're running, that might not be critical to national security at that time but it's also a post. >> It shifts the conversation in a way where they can use, for example, right now all the rage with nation states is to use metadata, put it into big data analytics, come up with a psychographic algorithm, and go after critical infrastructure executives with elevated privileges. You can do anything with those guys. You can spearfish them. The Russian modus operandi is to call and act like a recruiter, have that first touch of contact be the phone call, which they're not expecting. "Hey, I got this job. "Keep it on the down low. Don't tell anybody. "I'm going to send you the job description. "Here's the PDF." Take it from there. >> How should we think about the different nation state actors? You mentioned Russia, China, there's Iran, North Korea. Lay it out for us. >> Each geography has a different vibe to their hacking. With Russia you have this stealth and sophistication and their hacking is just like their espionage. It's like playing chess. They're really good at making pawns feel like they're kings on the chessboard so they're really good at recruiting insider threats. Bill Evanina is the head of counterintel. He's a bulldog. I know him personally. He's exactly what we need in that position. The Chinese hacking style is more smash and grab, very unsophisticated. They'll use a payload over and over again so forensically, it's easy to... >> Dave: Signatures. >> Yeah, it is. >> More shearing on the tooling or whatever. >> They'll use code to the point of redundancy so it's like alright, the only reason they got in... Chinese get into a network, not because of sophistication, but because the network is not protected. Then you have the mercenary element which is where China really thrives. Chinese PLA will hack for the nation state during the day, but they'll moonlight at night to North Korea so North Korea, they have people who may consider themselves hackers but they're not code writers. They outsource. >> They're brokers, like general contractors. >> They're not sophisticated enough to carry out a real nation state attack. What they'll do is outsource to Chinese PLA members. Chinese PLA members will be like, "okay well, here's what I need for this job." Typically, what the Chinese will do, their loyalties are different than in the west, during the day they'll discover a vulnerability or an O day. They won't tell their boss right away. They'll capitalize off of it for a week. You do that, you go to jail over here. Russia, they'll kill you. China, somehow this is an accepted thing. They don't like it but it just happens. Then you have the eastern European nations and Russia still uses mercenary elements out of Moscow and St. Petersburg so what they'll do is they will freelance, as well. That's when you get the sophisticated, carbonic style hack where they'll go into the financial sector. They'll monitor the situation. Learn the ins and outs of everything having to do with that particular swift or bank or whatever. They go in and those are the guys that are making millions of dollars on a breach. Hacking in general is a grind. It's a lot of vulnerabilities work, but few work for long. Everybody is always thinking there's this omega code that they have. >> It's just brute force. You just pound it all day long. >> That's it and it's a grind. You might have something that you worked on for six months. You're ready to monetize. >> What about South America? What's the vibe down there? Anything happening in there? >> Not really. There is nothing of substance that really affects us here. Again, if an organization is completely unprotected. >> John: Russia? China? >> Russia and China. >> What about our allies? >> GCHQ. >> Israel? What's the collaboration, coordination, snooping? What's the dynamic like there? >> We deal, mostly, with NATO and Five Eyes. I actually had dinner with NATO last night. Five Eyes is important because we share signals intelligence and most of the communications will go through Five Eyes which is California, United States, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. Those are our five most important allies and then NATO after that, as far as I'm concerned, for cyber. You have the whole weaponization of space going on with SATCOM interception. We're dealing with that with NASA, DARPA. Not a lot is happening down in South America. The next big thing that we have to look at is the cyber caliphate. You have the Muslim brotherhood that funds it. Their influence operations domestically are extremely strong. They have a lot of contacts on the Hill which is a problem. You have ANTIFA. So there's two sides to this. You have the technical exploit but then the information warfare exploit. >> What about the bitcoin underbelly that started with the silk roads and you've seen a lot of bitcoin. Money laundering is a big deal, know your customer. Now regulation is part of big ICOs going on. Are you seeing any activity from those? Are they pulling from previous mercenary groups or are they arbitraging just more free? >> For updating bitcoin? >> The whole bitcoin networks. There's been an effort to commercialize (mumbles) so there's been a legitimate track to bring that on but yet there's still a lot of actors. >> I think bitcoin is important to keep and if you look at the more black ops type hacking or payment stuff, bitcoin is an important element just as tor is an important element, just as encryption is an important element. >> John: It's fundamental, actually. >> It's a necessity so when I hear people on the Hill, I have my researcher, I'm like, "any time you hear somebody trying to have "weakened encryption, back door encryption" the first thing, we add them to the briefing schedule and I'm like, "look, here's what you're proposing. "You're proposing that you outlaw math. "So what? Two plus two doesn't equal four. "What is it? Three and a half? "Where's the logic?" When you break it down for them like that, on the Hill in particular, they begin to get it. They're like, "well how do we get the intelligence community "or the FBI, for example, to get into this iphone?" Civil liberties, you've got to take that into consideration. >> I got to ask you a question. I interviewed a guy, I won't say his name. He actually commented off the record, but he said to me, "you won't believe how dumb some of these state actors are "when it comes to cyber. "There's some super smart ones. "Specifically Iran and the Middle East, "they're really not that bright." He used an example, I don't know if it's true or not, that stuxnet, I forget which one it was, there was a test and it got out of control and they couldn't pull it back and it revealed their hand but it could've been something worse. His point was they actually screwed up their entire operation because they're doing some QA on their thing. >> I can't talk about stuxnet but it's easy to get... >> In terms of how you test them, how do you QA your work? >> James: How do you review malware? (mumbles) >> You can't comment on the accuracy of Zero Days, the documentary? >> Next question. Here's what you find. Some of these nation state actors, they saw what happened with our elections so they're like, "we have a really crappy offensive cyber program "but maybe we can thrive in influence operations "in propaganda and whatever." We're getting hit by everybody and 2020 is going to be, I don't even want to imagine. >> John: You think it's going to be out of control? >> It's going to be. >> I've got to ask this question, this came up. You're bringing up a really good point I think a lot of people aren't talking about but we've brought up a few times. I want to keep on getting it out there. In the old days, state on state actors used to do things, espionage, and everyone knew who they were and it was very important not to bring their queen out, if you will, too early, or reveal their moves. Now with Wikileaks and public domain, a lot of these tools are being democratized so that they can covertly put stuff out in the open for enemies of our country to just attack us at will. Is that happening? I hear about it, meaning that I might be Russia or I might be someone else. I don't want to reveal my hand but hey, you ISIS guys out there, all you guys in the Middle East might want to use this great hack and put it out in the open. >> I think yeah. The new world order, I guess. The order of things, the power positions are completely flipped, B side, counter, whatever. It's completely not what the establishment was thinking it would be. What's happening is Facebook is no more relevant, I mean Facebook is more relevant than the UN. Wikileaks has more information pulsating out of it than a CIA analyst, whatever. >> John: There's a democratization of the information? >> The thing is we're no longer a world that's divided by geographic lines in the sand that were drawn by these two guys that fought and lost a war 50 years ago. We're now in a tribal chieftain digital society and we're separated by ideological variation and so you have tribe members here in the US who have fellow tribe members in Israel, Russia, whatever. Look at Anonymous. Anonymous, I think everyone understands that's the biggest law enforcement honeypot there is, but you look at the ideological variation and it's hashtags and it's keywords and it's forums. That's the Senate. That's congress. >> John: This is a new reality. >> This is reality. >> How do you explain that to senators? I was watching that on TV where they're trying to grasp what Facebook is and Twitter. (mumbles) Certainly Facebook knew what was going on. They're trying to play policy and they're new. They're newbies when it comes to policy. They don't have any experience on the Hill, now it's ramping up and they've had some help but tech has never been an actor on the stage of policy formulation. >> We have a real problem. We're looking at outside threats as our national security threats, which is incorrect. You have dragnet surveillance capitalists. Here's the biggest threats we have. The weaponization of Facebook, twitter, youtube, google, and search engines like comcast. They all have a censorship algorithm, which is how they monetize your traffic. It's censorship. You're signing your rights away and your free will when you use google. You're not getting the right answer, you're getting the answer that coincides with an algorithm that they're meant to monetize and capitalize on. It's complete censorship. What's happening is, we had something that just passed SJ res 34 which no resistance whatsoever, blew my mind. What that allows is for a new actor, the ISPs to curate metadata on their users and charge them their monthly fee as well. It's completely corrupt. These dragnet surveillance capitalists have become dragnet surveillance censorists. Is that a word? Censorists? I'll make it one. Now they've become dragnet surveillance propagandists. That's why 2020 is up for grabs. >> (mumbles) We come from the same school here on this one, but here's the question. The younger generation, I asked a gentleman in the hallway on his way out, I said, "where's the cyber west point? "We're the Navy SEALS in this new digital culture." He said, "oh yeah, some things." We're talking about the younger generation, the kids playing Call of Duty Destiny. These are the guys out there, young kids coming up that will probably end up having multiple disciplinary skills. Where are they going to come from? So the question is, are we going to have a counterculture? We're almost feeling like what the 60s were to the 50s. Vietnam. I kind of feel like maybe the security stuff doesn't get taken care of, a revolt is coming. You talk about dragnet censorship. You're talking about the lack of control and privacy. I don't mind giving Facebook my data to connect with my friends and see my thanksgiving photos or whatever but now I don't want fake news jammed down my throat. Anti-Trump and Anti-Hillary spew. I didn't buy into that. I don't want that anymore. >> I think millennials, I have a 19 year old son, my researchers, they're right out of grad school. >> John: What's the profile like? >> They have no trust whatsoever in the government and they laugh at legislation. They don't care any more about having their face on their Facebook page and all their most intimate details of last night's date and tomorrow's date with two different, whatever. They just don't... They loathe the traditional way of things. You got to talk to General Alexander today. We have a really good relationship with him, Hayden, Mike Rogers. There is a counterculture in the works but it's not going to happen overnight because we have a tech deficit here where we need foreign tech people just to make up for the deficit. >> Bill Mann and I were talking, I heard the general basically, this is my interpretation, "if we don't get our shit together, "this is going to be an f'd up situation." That's what I heard him basically say. You guys don't come together so what Bill talked about was two scenarios. If industry and government don't share and come together, they're going to have stuff mandated on them by the government. Do you agree? >> I do. >> What's going to happen? >> The argument for regulation on the Hill is they don't want to stifle innovation, which makes sense but then ISPs don't innovate at all. They're using 1980s technology, so why did you pass SJ res 34? >> John: For access? >> I don't know because nation states just look at that as, "oh wow another treasure trove of metadata "that we can weaponize. "Let's start psychographically charging alt-left "and alt-right, you know what I mean?" >> Hacks are inevitable. That seems to be the trend. >> You talked before, James, about threats. You mentioned weaponization of social. >> James: Social media. >> You mentioned another in terms of ISPs I think. >> James: Dragnet. >> What are the big threats? Weaponization of social. ISP metadata, obviously. >> Metadata, it really depends and that's the thing. That's what makes the advisory so difficult because you have to go between influence operations and the exploit because the vectors are used for different things in different variations. >> John: Integrated model. >> It really is and so with a question like that I'm like okay so my biggest concern is the propaganda, political warfare, the information warfare. >> People are underestimating the value of how big that is, aren't they? They're oversimplifying the impact of info campaigns. >> Yeah because your reality is based off of... It's like this, influence operations. Traditional media, everybody is all about the narrative and controlling the narrative. What Russia understands is to control the narrative, the most embryo state of the narrative is the meme. Control the meme, control the idea. If you control the idea, you control the belief system. Control the belief system, you control the narrative. Control the narrative, you control the population. No guns were fired, see what I'm saying? >> I was explaining to a friend on Facebook, I was getting into a rant on this. I used a very simple example. In the advertising world, they run millions of dollars of ad campaigns on car companies for post car purchase cognitive dissonance campaigns. Just to make you feel good about your purchase. In a way, that's what's going on and explains what's going on on Facebook. This constant reinforcement of these beliefs whether its for Trump or Hillary, all this stuff was happening. I saw it firsthand. That's just one small nuance but it's across a spectrum of memes. >> You have all these people, you have nation states, you have mercenaries, but the most potent force in this space, the most hyperevolving in influence operations, is the special interest group. The well-funded special interests. That's going to be a problem. 2020, I keep hitting that because I was doing an interview earlier. 2020 is going to be a tug of war for the psychological core of the population and it's free game. Dragnet surveillance capitalists will absolutely be dragnet surveillance propagandists. They will have the candidates that they're going to push. Now that can also work against them because mainstream media, twitter, Facebook were completely against trump, for example, and that worked in his advantage. >> We've seen this before. I'm a little bit older, but we are the same generation. Remember when they were going to open up sealex? Remember the last mile for connectivity? That battle was won before it was even fought. What you're saying, if I get this right, the war and tug of war going on now is a big game. If it's not played in one now, this jerry rigging, gerrymandering of stuff could happen so when people wake up and realize what's happened the game has already been won. >> Yeah, your universe as you know it, your belief systems, what you hold to be true and self evident. Again, the embryo. If you look back to the embryo introduction of that concept, whatever concept it is, to your mind it came from somewhere else. There are very few things that you believe that you came up with yourself. The digital space expedites that process and that's dangerous because now it's being weaponized. >> Back to the, who fixes this. Who's the watchdog on this? These ideas you're talking about, some of them, you're like, "man that guy has lost it, he's crazy." Actually, I don't think you're crazy at all. I think it's right on. Is there a media outlet watching it? Who's reporting on it? What even can grasp what you're saying? What's going on in D.C.? Can you share that perspective? >> Yeah, the people that get this are the intelligence community, okay? The problem is the way we advise is I will go in with one of the silos in the NSA and explain what's happening and how to do it. They'll turn around their computer and say, "show me how to do it. "How do you do a multi vector campaign "with this meme and make it viral in 30 minutes." You have to be able to show them how to do it. >> John: We can do that. Actually we can't. >> That sort of thing, you have to be able to show them because there's not enough practitioners, we call them operators. When you're going in here, you're teaching them. >> The thing is if they have the metadata to your treasure trove, this is how they do it. I'll explain here. If they have the metadata, they know where the touch points are. It's a network effect mole, just distributive mole. They can put content in certain subnetworks that they know have a reaction to the metadata so they have the knowledge going in. It's not like they're scanning the whole world. They're monitoring pockets like a drone, right? Once they get over the territory, then they do the acquired deeper targets and then go viral. That's basically how fake news works. >> See the problem is, you look at something like alt-right and ANTIFA. ANTIFA, just like Black Lives Matter, the initiatives may have started out with righteous intentions just like take a knee. These initiatives, first stage is if it causes chaos, chaos is the op for a nation state in the US. That's the op. Chaos. That's the beginning and the end of an op. What happens is they will say, "oh okay look, this is ticking off all these other people "so let's fan the flame of this take a knee thing "hurt the NFL." Who cares? I don't watch football anyway but you know, take a knee. It's causing all this chaos. >> John: It's called trolling. >> What will happen is Russia and China, China has got their 13 five year plan, Russia has their foreign influence operations. They will fan that flame to exhaustion. Now what happens to the ANTIFA guy when he's a self-radicalized wound collector with a mental disorder? Maybe he's bipolar. Now with ANTIFA, he's experienced a heightened more extreme variation of that particular ideology so who steps in next? Cyber caliphate and Muslim brotherhood. That's why we're going to have an epidemic. I can't believe, you know, ANTIFA is a domestic terrorist organization. It's shocking that the FBI is not taking this more serious. What's happening now is Muslim brotherhood funds basically the cyber caliphate. The whole point of cyber caliphate is to create awareness, instill the illusion of rampant xenophobia for recruiting. They have self-radicalized wound collectors with ANTIFA that are already extremists anyway. They're just looking for a reason to take that up a notch. That's when, cyber caliphate, they hook up with them with a hashtag. They respond and they create a relationship. >> John: They get the fly wheel going. >> They take them to a deep web forum, dark web forum, and start showing them how it works. You can do this. You can be part of something. This guy who was never even muslim now is going under the ISIS moniker and he acts. He drives people over in New York. >> They fossilized their belief system. >> The whole point to the cyber caliphate is to find actors that are already in the self-radicalization phase but what does it take psychologically and from a mentoring perspective, to get them to act? That's the cyber caliphate. >> This is the value of data and context in real time using the current events to use that data, refuel their operation. It's data driven terrorism. >> What's the prescription that you're advising? >> I'm not a regulations kind of guy, but any time you're curating metadata like we're just talking about right now. Any time you have organizations like google, like Facebook, that have become so big, they are like their own nation state. That's a dangerous thing. The metadata curation. >> John: The value of the data is very big. That's the point. >> It is because what's happening... >> John: There's always a vulnerability. >> There's always a vulnerability and it will be exploited and all that metadata, it's unscrubbed. I'm not worried about them selling metadata that's scrubbed. I'm worried about the nation state or the sophisticated actor that already has a remote access Trojan on the network and is exfiltrating in real time. That's the guy that I'm worried about because he can just say, "forget it, I'm going to target people that are at this phase." He knows how to write algorithms, comes up with a good psychographic algorithm, puts the data in there, and now he's like, "look I'm only going to promote this concept, "two people at this particular stage of self-radicalization "or sympathetic to the kremlin." We have a big problem on the college campuses with IP theft because of the Chinese Students Scholar Associations which are directly run by the Chinese communist party. >> I heard a rumor that Equifax's franchising strategy had partners on the VPN that were state sponsored. They weren't even hacking, they had full access. >> There's a reason that the Chinese are buying hotels. They bought the Waldorf Astoria. We do stuff with the UN and NATO, you can't even stay there anymore. I think it's still under construction but it's a no-no to stay there anymore. I mean western nations and allies because they'll have bugs in the rooms. The WiFi that you use... >> Has fake certificates. >> Or there's a vulnerability that's left in that network so the information for executives who have IP or PII or electronic health records, you know what I mean? You go to these places to stay overnight, as an executive, and you're compromised. >> Look what happened with Eugene Kaspersky. I don't know the real story. I don't know if you can comment, but someone sees that and says, "this guy used to have high level meetings "at the Pentagon weekly, monthly." Now he's persona non grata. >> He fell out of favor, I guess, right? It happens. >> James, great conversation. Thanks for coming on the Cube. Congratulations on the great work you guys are doing here at the event. I know the content has been well received. Certainly the key notes we saw were awesome. CSOs, view from the government, from industry, congratulations. James Scott who is the co founder and senior fellow of ICIT, Internet Critical Infrastructure Technology. >> James: Institute of Critical Infrastructure Technology. >> T is for tech. >> And the Center for Cyber Influence Operations Studies. >> Good stuff. A lot of stuff going on (mumbles), exploits, infrastructure, it's all mainstream. It's the crisis of our generation. There's a radical shift happening and the answers are all going to come from industry and government coming together. This is the Cube bringing the data, I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante. Thanks for watching. More live coverage after this short break. (music)