>>All we're back. We're wrapping up day two at Falcon 22 from the area in Las Vegas, CrowdStrike CrowdStrike. The action is crazy. Second day, a keynotes. Sean Henry is back. He's the chief security officer at CrowdStrike. He did a keynote today. Sean. Good to see you. Thanks for coming >>Back. Good. See you, Dave. Thanks for having me. >>So, unfortunately, I wasn't able to see your keynote cuz I had to come do cube interviews. You interviewed Kimbo Walden from, from, you know, white house, right? >>National cyber security >>Director. We're gonna talk about that. We're gonna talk about Overwatch, your threat hunting report. I want to share the results with our audience, but start with your, well actually start with the event. We're now in day two, you've had a good chance to talk to customers and partners. What are, what are your observations? Yeah, >>It's first of all, it's been an amazing event over 2200 attendees here. It's really taking top three floors at the area hotel and we've got partners and customers, employees, and to see the excitement and the level of collaboration here is absolutely phenomenal. All these different organizations that are each have a piece of cyber security to see them coming together, all in support of how do you stop breaches? How do you work together to do it? It's really been absolutely phenomenal. You're >>Gonna love the collaboration. We kind of talked about this on our earlier segment is the industry has to do a better job and has been doing a better job. You know, I think you and Kevin laid that out pretty well. So tell me about the interview with the fireside chat with Kimba. What was that like? What topics came up? >>Yeah. Kimba is the principal, deputy national cyber security advisor. She's been there for just four months. She spent over 10 years at DHS, but she most recently came from the private sector in cybersecurity. So she's got that the experience as a private sector expert, as well as a public sector expert and to see her come together in that position. It was great. We talked a lot about some of the strategies the white house is looking to put forth in their new cybersecurity strategy. There was recently an executive order, right? That the, the president put forth that talks about a lot of the things that we're doing here. So for example, the executive order talks about a lot of the legacy type of capabilities being put to pasture and about the government embracing cloud, embracing threat, hunting, embracing EDR, embracing zero trust and identity protection. Those are all the things that the private sector has been moving towards over the last year or two. That's what this is all about here. But to see the white house put that out, that all government agencies will now be embracing that I think it puts them on a much shorter footing and it allows the government to be able to identify vulnerabilities before they get exploited. It allows them to much more quickly identify, have visibility and respond to, to threats. So the government in infrastructure will be safer. And it was really nice to hear her talk about that and about how the private sector can work with the government. >>So you know how this works, you know, having been in the bureau. But so it's the, these executive orders. A lot of times people think, oh, it's just symbolic. And there are a couple of aspects of it. One is president Biden really impressed upon the private sector to, you know, amp it up to, to really focus and do a better job. But also as you pointed out that executive order can adjudicate what government agencies must do must prioritize. So it's more than symbolic. It's actually taking action. Isn't >>It? Yeah. I, I, I think it, I think it's both. I think it's important for the government to lead in this area because while a, a large portion of infrastructure, major companies, they understand this, there is still a whole section of private sector organizations that don't understand this and to see the white house, roll it out. I think that's good leadership and that is symbolic. But then to your second point to mandate that government agencies do this, it really pushes those. That might be a bit reluctant. It pushes them forward. And I think this is the, the, the type of action that as it starts to roll out and people become more comfortable and they start to see the successes. They understand that they're becoming safer, that they're reducing risk. It really is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy and we see things become much safer. Did, >>Did you guys talk about Ukraine? Was that, was that off limits or did that come up at all? >>It wasn't, it wasn't off limits, but we didn't talk about it because there are so many other things we were discussing. We were talking about this, the cyber security workforce, for example, and the huge gap in the number of people who have the expertise, the capability and the, and the opportunities to them to come into cyber security technology broadly, but then cyber security as a sub sub component of that. And some of the programs, they just had a big cyber workforce strategy. They invited a lot of people from the private sector to have this conversation about how do you focus on stem? How do you get younger people? How do you get women involved? So getting maybe perhaps to the untapped individuals that would step forward and be an important stop gap and an important component to this dearth of talent and it's absolutely needed. So that was, was one thing. There were a number of other things. Yeah. >>So I mean, pre pandemic, I thought the number was 350,000 open cybersecurity jobs. I heard a number yesterday just in the us. And you might have even told me this 7, 7 50. So it's doubled in just free to post isolation economy. I don't know what the stats are, but too big. Well, as a, as a CSO, how much can automation do to, to close that gap? You know, we were talking earlier on the cube about, you gotta keep the humans in the loop, you, you, the, the, the, the Nirvana of the machines will just take care of everything is just probably not gonna happen anytime in the near term, even midterm or long term, but, but, but how can automation play and help close that gap? So >>The, the automation piece is, is what allows this to scale. You know, if we had one company with a hundred endpoints and we had a couple of folks there, you could do it with humans. A lot of it when you're talking about hundreds of millions of endpoints spread around the globe, you're talking about literally trillions of events every week that are being identified, evaluated and determined whether they're malicious or not. You have to have automation and to have using the cloud, using AI, using machine learning, to sort through, and really look for the malicious needle in a stack of needle. So you've gotta get that fidelity, that fine tune review. And you can only do that with automation. What you gotta remember, Dave, is that there's a human being at the end of every one of these attacks. So we've got the bad guys, have humans there, they're using the technology to scale. We're using the technology to scale to detect them. But then when you get down to the really malicious activity, having human beings involved is gonna take it to another level and allow you to eradicate the adversaries from the environment. >>Okay. So they'll use machines to knock on the door when that door gets opened and they're in, and they're saying, okay, where do we go from here? And they're directing strategy. Absolutely. I, I spent, I think gave me a sta I, I wonder if I wrote it down correctly, 2 trillion events per day. Yeah. That you guys see is that I write that down. Right? >>You did. It changes just like the number of jobs. It changes when I started talking about this just a, a year and a half ago, it was a billion a day. And when you look at how it's multiplied exponentially, and that will continue because of the number of applications, because of the number of devices as that gets bigger, the number of events gets bigger. And that's one of the problems that we have here is the spread of the network. The vulnerability, the environment is getting bigger and bigger and bigger as it gets bigger, more opportunities for bad guys to exploit vulnerabilities. >>Yeah. And we, we were talking earlier about IOT and extending, you know, that, that threats surface as well, talk about the Overwatch threat hunting report. What is that? How, how often have you run it? And I'd love to get into some of the results. Yeah. >>So Overwatch is a service that we offer where we have 24 by seven threat hunters that are operating in our customer environments. They're hunting, looking for, looking for malicious activity, malicious behavior. And to the point you just made earlier, where we use automation to sort out and filter what is clearly bad. When an adversary does get what we call fingers on the keyboard. So they're in the box and now a human being, they get a hit on their automated attack. They get a hit that, Hey, we're in, it's kind of the equivalent of looking at the Bober while you're fishing. Yeah. When you see the barber move, then the fisherman jumps up from his nap and starts to reel it in similar. They jump on the keyboard fingers on the keyboard. Our Overwatch team is detecting them very, very quickly. So we found 77,000 potential intrusions this past year in 2021, up to the end of June one, one every seven minutes from those detections. >>When we saw these detections, we were able to identify unusual adversary behavior that we'd not necessar necessarily seen before we call it indicators of attack. What does that mean? It means we're seeing an adversary, taking a new action, using a new tactic. Our Overwatch team can take that from watching it to human beings. They take it, they give it to our, our engineering team and they can write detections, which now become automated, right? So you have, you have all the automation that filters out all the bad stuff. One gets through a bad guy, jumps up, he's on the keyboard. And now he's starting to execute commands on the system. Our team sees that pulls those commands out. They're unusual. We've not seen 'em before we give it to our engineering team. They write detections that now all become automated. So because of that, we stopped over with the 77,000 attacks that we identified. We stopped over a million new attacks that would've come in and exploited a network. So it really is kind of a big circle where you've got human beings and intelligence and technology, all working together to make the system smarter, to make the people smarter and make the customers safer. And you're >>Seeing new IAS pop up all the time, and you're able to identify those and, and codify 'em. Now you've announced at reinforced, I, I, in July in Boston, you announced the threat hunting service, which is also, I think, part of your you're the president as well of that services division, right? So how's that going? What >>What's happening there? What we announced. So we've the Overwatch team has been involved working in customer environments and working on the back end in our cloud for many years. What we've announced is this cloud hunting, where, because of the adoption of the cloud and the movement to the cloud of so many organizations, they're pushing data to the cloud, but we're seeing adversaries really ramp up their attacks against the cloud. So we're hunting in Google cloud in Microsoft Azure cloud in AWS, looking for anomalous behavior, very similar to what we do in customer environments, looking for anomalous behavior, looking for credential exploitation, looking for lateral movement. And we are having a great success there because as that target space increases, there's a much greater need for customers to ensure that it's protected. So >>The cloud obviously is very secure. You got some of the best experts in the planet inside of hyperscale companies. So, and whether it's physical security or logical security, they're obviously, you know, doing a good job is the weakness, the seams between where the cloud provider leaves off and the customer has to take over that shared responsibility model, you know, misconfiguring and S3 bucket is the, you know, the common one, but I'm so there like a zillion others, where's that weakness. Yeah. >>That, that's exactly right. We see, we see oftentimes the it piece enabling the cloud piece and there's a connectivity there, and there is a seam there. Sometimes we also see misconfiguration, and these are some of the things that our, our cloud hunters will find. They'll identify again, the equivalent of, of walking down the hallway and seeing a door that's unlocked, making sure it's locked before it gets exploited. So they may see active exploitation, which they're negating, but they also are able to help identify vulnerabilities prior to them getting exploited. And, you know, the ability for organizations to successfully manage their infrastructure is a really critical part of this. It's not always malicious actors. It's identifying where the infrastructure can be shored up, make it more resilient so that you can prevent some of these attacks from happening. I >>Heard, heard this week earlier, something I hadn't heard before, but it makes a lot of sense, you know, patch Tuesday means hack Wednesday. And, and so I, I presume that the, the companies releasing patches is like a signal to the bad guys that Hey, you know, free for all go because people aren't necessarily gonna patch. And then the solar winds customers are now circumspect about patches. The very patches that are supposed to protect us with the solar winds hack were the cause of the malware getting in and, you know, reforming, et cetera. So that's a complicated equation. Yeah. >>It, it certainly is a couple, couple parts there to unwind. First, when you, you think about patch Tuesday, there are adversaries often, not always that are already exploiting some of those vulnerabilities in the wild. So it's a zero day. It's not yet been patched in some cases hasn't yet been identified. So you've got people who are actively exploiting. It we've found zero days in the course of our threat hunting. We report them in a, in a, in a responsible way. We've gone to Microsoft. We've told them a couple times in the last few months that we found a zero day and give them an opportunity to patch that before anybody goes public with it, because absolutely right when it does go public, those that didn't know about it before recognize that there will be millions of devices depending on the, the vulnerability that are out there and exploitable. And they will absolutely, it will tell everybody that you can now go to this particular place. And there's an opportunity to gain access, to exploit privileges, depending on the criticality of the patch. >>I, I don't, I, I don't, I'm sorry to generalize, but I wanna ask you about the hacker mindset. Let's say that what you just described a narrow set of hackers knows that there's an unpatched, you know, vulnerability, and they're making money off of that. Will they keep that to themselves? Will they share that with other folks in the net? Will they sell that information? Or is it, is it one of those? It depends. It, >>I was just gonna say, it depends you, you beat me to it. It absolutely depends. All of, all of the above would be the answer. We certainly see organ now a nation state for example, would absolutely keep that to themselves. Yeah. Right. Their goal is very different from an organized crime group, which might sell access. And we see them all the time in the underground selling access. That's how they make money nation states. They want to keep a zero day to themselves. It's something they're able to exploit in some cases for months or years, that that, that vulnerability goes undetected. But a nation state is aware of it and exploiting it. It's a, it's a dangerous game. And it just, I think, exemplifies the importance of ensuring that you're doing everything you can to patch in a timely matter. Well, >>Sean, we appreciate the work that you've done in your previous role and continuing to advance education, knowledge and protection in our industry. Thank you for coming on >>You. Thank you for having me. This is a fantastic event. Really appreciate you being here and helping to educate folks. Yeah. >>You guys do do a great job. Awesome. Set that you built and look forward to future events with you guys. My >>Friends. Thanks so much, Dave. Yeah. Thank >>You. Bye now. All right. Appreciate it. All right, keep it right there. We're gonna wrap up in a moment. Live from Falcon 22. You're watching the cube.

>>Welcome back to the aria in Las Vegas, Dave Valante with Dave Nicholson, Falcon 22, the Cube's continuous coverage. Sean Henry is here. He's the president of the services division and he's the chief security officer at CrowdStrike. And he's joined by Kevin mania, CEO of Mandy. Now part of Google Jens. Welcome to the cube. Thank you. Congrats on closing the Google deal. Thank you. That's great. New chapter, >>New >>Chapter coming fresh off the keynote, you and George. I really en enjoyed that. Let's start there. One of the things you talked about was the changes you've been, you've been in this business for a while. I think you were talking about, you know, doing some of these early stuff in the nineties. Wow. Things have changed a lot the queen, right? Right. You used to put the perimeter around the queen. Yeah. Build the Mo the Queen's left or castle new ballgame. But you were talking about the board level knowledge of security in the organization. Talk about that change. That's occurred in the last >>Decade. You know, boards are all about governance, right? Making sure everybody's doing the right things. And they've kind of had a haul pass on cybersecurity for a long time. Like we expect them to be great at financial diligence, they understand the financials of an organization. You're gonna see a maturity, I think in cybersecurity where I think board members all know, Hey, there's risk out there. And we're on our own to kind of defend ourselves from it, but they don't know how to quantify it. And they don't know how to express it. So bottom line boards are interested in cyber and we just have to mature as an industry to give them the tools they need to measure it appropriately. >>Sean, one of the things I wanted to ask you. So Steven Schmidt, I noticed changed his title from CISOs chief inf information security officer, the chief security officer. Your title is chief security officer. Is that a nuance that has meaning to you or is it just less acronym? >>It depends on the organization that you're in, in our organization, the chief security officer owns all risks. So I have a CISO that comes underneath me. Yep. And I've got a security folks that are handling our facilities, our personnel, those sorts of things, all, all of our offices around the globe. So it's all things security. One of the things that we've found and Kevin and I were actually talking about this earlier is this intersection between the physical world and the virtual world. And if you've got adversaries that want gain access to your organization, they might do it remotely by trying to hack into your network. But they also might try to get one of your employees to take an action on their behalf, or they might try to get somebody hired into your company to take some nefarious acts. So from a security perspective, it's about building an envelope around all things valuable and then working it in a collaborative way. So there's a lot of interface, a lot of interaction and a lot of value in putting those things together. And, >>And you're also president of the services division. Is that a P and L role or >>It is, we have a it's P P O P and L. And we have an entire organization that's doing incident response and it's a lot of the work that we're doing with, with Kevin's folks now. So I've got both of those hats today. >>Okay. So self-funded so in a way, okay. Where are companies most at risk today? >>Huh? You wanna go on that one first? Sean, you talk fast than me. So it's bigger bang for the buck. If >>You >>Talk, you know, when I, when I think about, about companies in terms of, of their risk, it's a lot of it has to do with the expansion of the network. Companies are adding new applications, new devices, they're expanding into new areas. There are new technologies that are being developed every day and that are being embraced every day. And all of those technologies, all of those applications, all of that hardware is susceptible to attack. Adversaries are looking for the vulnerabilities they can exploit. And I think just kind of that sprawl is something that is, is disconcerting to me from a security perspective, we need to know where our assets are, where the vulnerabilities lie, how do we plug the holes? And having that visibility is really critical to ensure that you're you're in, involved in mitigating that, that new architecture, >>Anything you >>Did. Yeah. I would like when I, so I can just tell you what I'm hearing from CISOs out there. They're worried about identity, the lateral movement. That's been kind of part of every impactful breach. So in identity's kind of top three of mind, I would say zero trust, whatever that means. And we all have our own definitions of migration to zero trust and supply chain risk. You know, whether they're the supplier, they wanna make sure they can prove to their customers, they have great security practices. Or if they're a consumer of a supply chain, you need to understand who's in their supply chain. What are their dependencies? How secure are they? Those are just three topics that come up all the time. >>As we extend, you know, talking about XDR the X being extend. Do you see physical security as something that's being extended into? Or is it, or is it already kind of readily accepted that physical security goes hand in hand with information security? >>I, I don't think a lot of people think that way there certainly are some and Dave mentions Amazon and Steve Schmidt as a CSO, right? There's a CSO that works for him as well. CJ's clear integration. There's an intelligence component to that. And I think that there are certain organizations that are starting to recognize and understand that when we say there's no real perimeter, it, it expands the network expands into the physical space. And if you're not protecting that, you know, if you don't protect the, the server room and somebody can actually walk in the doors unlocked, you've got a vulnerability that might be exploited. So I think to, to recognize the value of that integration from a security perspective, to be holistic and for organizations to adopt a security first philosophy that all the employees recognize they're, they're the, the first line of defense. Oftentimes not just from a fish, but by somebody catching up with them and handing 'em a thumb drive, Hey, can you take a look at this document? For me, that's a potential vulnerability as well. So those things need to be integrated. >>I thought the most interesting part of the keynote this morning is when George asked you about election security and you immediately went to the election infrastructure. I was like, yeah. Okay. Yeah. But then I was so happy to hear you. You went to the disinformation, I learned something there about your monitoring, the network effects. Sure. And, and actually there's a career stream around that. Right. The reason I had so years ago I interviewed was like, this was 2016, Robert Gates. Okay. Former defense. And I, I said, yeah, but don't we have the best cyber can't we go on the offense. He said, wait a minute, we have the most to lose. Right. But, but you gave an example where you can identify the bots. Like let's say there's disinformation out there. You could actually use bots in a positive way to disseminate the, the truth in theory. Good. Is, is that something that's actually happening >>Out there? Well, I think we're all still learning. You know, you can have deep fakes, both audible files or visual files, right. And images. And there's no question. The next generation, you do have to professionalize the news that you consume. And we're probably gonna have to professionalize the other side critical thinking because we are a marketplace of ideas in an open society. And it's hard to tell where's the line between someone's opinion and intentional deception, you know, and sometimes it could be the source, a foreign threat, trying to influence the hearts and minds of citizens, but there's gonna be an internal threat or domestic threat as well to people that have certain ideas and concepts that they're zealots about. >>Is it enough to, is it enough to simply expose where the information is coming from? Because, you know, look, I, I could make the case that the red Sox, right. Or a horrible baseball team, and you should never go to Fenway >>And your Yankees Jersey. >>Right. Right. So is that disinformation, is that misinformation? He'd say yes. Someone else would say no, but it would be good to know that a thousand bots from some troll farm, right. Are behind us. >>There's, it's helpful to know if something can be tied to identity or is totally anonymous. Start just there. Yeah. Yeah. You can still protect the identity over time. I think all of us, if you're gonna trust the source, you actually know the source. Right. So I do believe, and, and by the way, much longer conversation about anonymity versus privacy and then trust, right. And all three, you could spend this whole interview on, but we have to have a trustworthy internet as well. And that's not just in the tech and the security of it, but over time it could very well be how we're being manipulated as citizens and people. >>When you guys talk to customers and, and peers, when somebody gets breached, what's the number one thing that you hear that they wished they'd done that they didn't. >>I think we talked about this earlier, and I think identity is something that we're talking about here. How are you, how are you protecting your assets? How do you know who's authorized to have access? How do you contain the, the access that they have? And the, the area we see with, with these malware free attacks, where adversaries are using the existing capabilities, the operating system to move laterally through the network. I mean, Kevin's folks, my folks, when we respond to an incident, it's about looking at that lateral movement to try and get a full understanding of where the adversary's been, where they're going, what they're doing, and to try to, to find a root cause analysis. And it really is a, a critical part. >>So part of the reason I was asking you about, was it a P and L cuz you, you wear two hats, right? You've got revenue generation on one side and then you've got you protect, you know, the company and you've got peer relationships. So the reason I bring this up is I felt like when stucks net occurred, there was a lot of lip service around, Hey, we, as an industry are gonna work together. And then what you saw was a lot of attempts to monetize, you know, private data, sell private reports and things of that nature you were referencing today, Kevin, that you think the industry's doing a much better job of, of collaboration. Is it, can you talk about that and maybe give some examples? >>Absolutely. I mean, you know, I lived through it as a victim of a breach couple years ago. If you see something new and novel, I, I just can't imagine you getting away with keeping it a secret. I mean, I would even go, what are you doing? Harboring that if you have it, that doesn't mean you tell the whole world, you don't come on your show and say, Hey, we got something new novel, everybody panic, you start contacting the people that are most germane to fixing the problem before you tell the world. So if I see something that's new in novel, certainly con Sean and the team at CrowdStrike saying, Hey, there's because they protect so many endpoints and they defend nations and you gotta get to Microsoft. You have to talk to pan. You have to get to the companies that have a large capability to do shields up. And I think you do that immediately. You can't sit on new and novel. You get to the vendor where the vulnerability is, all these things have to happen at a great rate to speak. >>So you guys probably won't comment, but I'm betting dollars to donuts. This Uber lapses hack you guys knew about. >>I turned to you. >>No comment. I'm guessing. I'm guessing that the, that wasn't novel. My point being, let me, let me ask it in a more generic fashion that you can maybe comment you you're. I think you're my, my inference is we're com the industry is compressing the time between a zero day and a fix. Absolutely. Absolutely. Like dramatically. >>Yes. Oh, awareness of it and AIX. Yes. Yeah. >>Okay. Yeah. And a lot of the hacks that we see as lay people in the media you've known about for quite some time, is that fair or no, not necessarily. >>It's, you know, it's harder to handle an intrusion quietly and discreetly these days, especially with what you're up against and, and most CEOs, by the way, their intent isn't, let's handle it quietly and discreetly it's what do we do about it? And what's the right way to handle it. And they wanna inform their customers and they wanna inform people that might be impacted. I wouldn't say we know it all that far ahead of time >>And, and depends. And, and I, I think companies don't know it. Yeah. Companies don't know they've been breached for weeks or months or years in some cases. Right. Which talks about a couple things, first of all, some of the sophistication of the adversaries, but it also talks about the inability of companies to often detect this type of activity when we're brought in. It's typically very quickly after the company finds out because they recognize they've gotta take action. They've got liability, they've got brand protection. There, whole sorts of, of things they need to take care of. And we're brought in it may or may not be, become public, but >>CrowdStrike was founded on the premise that the unstoppable breach is a myth. Now that's a, that's a bold sort of vision. We're not there yet, obviously. And a and a, and a, a CSO can't, you know, accept that. Right. You've gotta always be vigilant, but is that something that is, that we're gonna actually see manifest, you know, in any, any time in the near term? I mean, thinking about the Falcon platform, you guys are users of that. I don't know if that is part of the answer, but part of it's technology, but without the cultural aspects, the people side of things, you're never gonna get there. >>I can tell you, I started Maning in 2004 at the premise security breaches are inevitable, far less marketable. Yeah. You know, stop breaches. >>So >>Yeah. I, I think you have to learn how to manage this, right? It's like healthcare, you're not gonna stop every disease, but there's a lot of things that you can do to mitigate the consequences of those things. The same thing with network security, there's a lot of actions that organizations can take to help protect them in a way that allows them to live and, and operate in a, in a, a strong position. If companies are lackadaisical that irresponsible, they don't care. Those are companies that are gonna suffer. But I think you can manage this if you're using the right technology, the right people, you've got the right philosophy security first >>In, in the culture. >>Well, I can tell you very quickly, three reasons why people think, why is there an intrusion? It should just go away. Well, wherever money goes, crime follows. We still have crime. So you're still gonna have intrusions, whether it has to be someone on the inside or faulty software and people being paid the right faulty software, you're gonna have war. That's gonna create war in the cyber domain. So information warriors are gonna try to have intrusions to get to command and control. So wherever you have command and control, you'll have a war fighter. And then wherever you have information, you have ESP Espino. So you're gonna have people trying to break in at all times. >>And, and to tie that up because everything Kevin said is absolutely right. And what he just said at the very end was people, there are human beings that are on the other side of every single attack. And think about this until you physically get physically get to the people that are doing it and stop them. Yes, this will go on forever because you can block them, but they're gonna move and you can block them again. They're gonna move their objectives. Don't change because the information you have, whether it's financial information, intellectual property, strategic military information, that's still there. They will always come at it, which is where that physical component comes in. If you're able to block well enough and they can't get you remotely, they might send somebody in. Well, >>I, in the keynote, I, I'm not kidding. I'm looking around the room and I'm thinking there's at least one person here that is here primarily to gather intelligence, to help them defeat. What's being talked about here. >>Well, you said it's, >>It's kind >>Of creepy. You said the adversary is, is very well equipped and motivated. Why do you Rob banks? Well, that's where the money is, but it's more than that. Now with state sponsored terrorism and, you know, exfiltration of state secrets, I mean, there's, it's high stake's games. You got, this >>Has become a tool of nation states in terms from a political perspective, from a military perspective, if you look at what happened with Ukraine and Russia, all the work that was done in advanced by the Russians to soften up the Ukrainians, not just collection of intelligence, not just denial of services, but then disruptive attacks to change the entire complexity of the battlefield. This, this is a, an area that's never going away. It's becoming ingrained in our lives. And it's gonna be utilized for nefarious acts for many, many decades to come. >>I mean, you're right, Sean, we're seeing the future of war right before us is, is there's. There is going to be, there is a cyber component now in war, >>I think it signals the cyber component signals the silent intention of nations period, the silent projection of power probably before you see kinetics. >>And this is where gates says we have a lot more to lose as a country. So it's hard for us to go on the offense. We have to be very careful about our offensive capabilities because >>Of one of the things that, that we do need to, to do though, is we need to define what the red lines are to adversaries. Because when you talk about human beings, you've gotta put a deterrent in place so that if the adversaries know that if you cross this line, this is what the response is going to be. It's the way things were done during nuclear proliferation, right? Right. During the cold war, here's what the actions are gonna be. It's gonna be, it's gonna be mutual destruction and you can't do it. And we didn't have a nuclear war. We're at a point now where adversaries are pushing the envelope constantly, where they're turning off the lights in certain countries where they're taking actions that are, are quite detrimental to the host governments and those red lines have to be very clear, very clearly defined and acted upon if they're >>Crossed as security experts. Can you always tie that signature back to say a particular country or a particular group? >>Absolutely. 100% every >>Time I know. Yeah. No, it it's. It's a great question. You, you need to get attribution right. To get to deterrence, right. And without attribution, where do you proportionate respond to whatever act you're responding to? So attribution's critical. Both our companies work hard at doing it and it, and that's why I think you're not gonna see too many false flag operations in cyberspace, but when you do and they're well crafted or one nation masquerades is another, it, it, it's one of the last rules of the playground I haven't seen broken yet. And that that'll be an unfortunate day. >>Yeah. Because that mutually assure destruction, a death spot like Putin can say, well, it wasn't wasn't me. Right. So, and ironically, >>It's human intelligence, right. That ultimately is gonna be the only way to uncover >>That human intelligence is a big component. >>For sure. Right. And, and David, like when you go back to, you were referring to Robert Gates, it's the asymmetry of cyberspace, right? One person in one nation. That's not a control by asset could still do an act. And it, it just adds to the complexity of, we have attribution it's from that nation, but was it in order? Was it done on behalf of that nation? Very complicated. >>So this is an industry of superheroes. Thank you guys for all you do and appreciate you coming on the cube. Wow. >>I love your Cape. >>Thank all right. Keep it right there. Dave Nicholson and Dave ante be right back from Falcon 22 from the area you watching the cue.