Category: Uncategorized

Υπάρχει ταβάνι

“Ειναι αποριας αξιο πώς ολοκληροι ομιλοι στηριζουν το IT τους σε τραγικα ηλιθιους IT Directors.”

Αυτό εμφανίστηκε κάπου στο timeline. Θα επιχειρήσω μια προσέγγιση. Δεν είναι κάτι για να πέφτει από τα σύννεφα κανείς. Είναι κάτι το αναμενόμενο. Με την εξαίρεση οργανισμών που ασχολούνται με την Πληροφορική (και δεν εννοώ τους box movers) το ITιλίκι δεν είναι καριέρα. Δεν είναι μια διαδρομή που θα οδηγήσει κάποιον στα “ανώτερα πατώματα” της διοίκησης. Και γιατί να ήταν άλλωστε;

Μια τυπική πορεία ξεκινάει από τον τύπο που “τα φτιάχνει όλα” και τον αγαπάει όλος ο κόσμος. Αλλά αυτό τελειώνει. Τελειώνει όταν δεν τους δείχνει πως να κατεβάσουν μια ταινία, όταν δεν τους αφήνει να εγκαταστήσουν σπασμένο πρόγραμμα στον υπολογιστή τους, όταν τους φωνάξει γιατί για 32η φορά μέσα στο μήνα πρέπει να στήσει το PC τους που κόλλησε ιό “από μόνο του”. Φυσικά αυτό συμβαίνει στην πορεία του χρόνου και ενώ ο ήρωάς μας “ανεβαίνει” την ιεραρχία του οργανισμού (δεν έχει σημασία εάν είναι θεσπισμένη ή όχι) με την κούραση να σωρεύεται και την συνειδητοποίηση πως παρόλο που το IT είναι “η καρδιά του οργανισμού” (α) δεν το ξέρει κανείς άλλος και (β) δεν είναι το αντικείμενο του οργανισμού.

“Κάθε φορά που σε βλέπω μου έχεις έξοδα!”

Αυτό το είπε στον head of IT ο ιδιοκτήτης μεγάλης εταιρίας με παρουσία σε πολλές χώρες. Και δεν του είπε ψέμματα. Όποτε τον βλέπει μιλάνε για δαπάνες. Ποτέ για κέρδη. Οι καλύτερες μέρες είναι αυτές στις οποίες μιλάνε για περικοπές και για εξοικονόμηση χρημάτων που έχει επιτευχθεί. Φανταστείτε λοιπόν μια συνάντηση όλων των επικεφαλής στον οργανισμό κατά τη διάρκεια της οποίας οι άλλοι μιλάνε για τις πωλήσεις που έφεραν, τα έσοδα που έχουν έρθει, τι περιμένουν να έρθει ως εισροή και μόνο ένας να μιλάει στην καλύτερη περίπτωση για εξοικονομήσεις και στην γενική για έξοδα. Ακόμα κι όταν όλοι του ζητάνε θαύματα η χρηματοδότηση της υποδομής τους είναι ένας αγώνας στον οποίο μάλιστα τα προηγούμενα θαύματα δεν παίζουν κανένα ρόλο.

Στο παράδειγμα που ανέφερα πριν, ο συγκεκριμένος head of IT έσωσε (στην κυριολεξία) την εταιρία μια και είχε καταφέρει να διαθέτει ένα NAS με snapshots και έτσι όταν ένας χρήστης έσβησε σημαντικά στοιχεία προϋπολογισμού κατά λάθος και γύρω στις 04:00 το πρωί, μπόρεσε να τα επαναφέρει άμεσα. Θα περίμενε κανείς, αυτό να του έδινε μια ευχέρεια για έξοδα. Του έδωσε το παράπονο που διαβάσατε.

Τέτοιες ιστορίες έχει να αφηγηθεί ο καθένας πολλές. Αυτό που συμβαίνει όμως όσο εμείς ανταλλάσσουμε ιστορίες είναι πως οι καριερίστες αποφεύγουν τις θέσεις ευθύνης IT και πάνε προς αυτές που τους φτιάχνουν το προφίλ μέσα στον οργανισμό. Που τους διευκολύνουν την καριέρα και που θα τους εξασφαλίσουν μια καλύτερη θέση και σε άλλο (ανταγωνιστικό;) οργανισμό. Ταυτόχρονα οι ITήδες ενώ ασχολούνται με το να υπάρχει ο οργανισμός, δεν ασχολούνται με το αντικείμενό του. Δεν είναι να απορεί κανείς λοιπόν που:

“When times are tough IT gets beaten hard” –Rolf von Roessing

Ποιοι μένουν λοιπόν; Μένουν αυτοί που δεν μπορούν να προαχθούν αλλού αλλά ούτε και να “φύγουν” (δες το σαν δυσμενή προαγωγή), αυτοί που δεν ενδιαφέρονται και που μετράνε τις μέρες για να πάρουν σύνταξη, αυτοί που από ατυχία βρέθηκαν εκεί και σχεδιάζουν να αλλάξουν τμήμα μέσα στον πρώτο χρόνο. Α ναι υπάρχουν και αυτοί οι λίγοι και άτυχοι που τους αρέσει το ΙΤ, που θέλουν να τρέξουν αποδοτικά αυτό το κομάτι και που έρχονται να τους πουλήσουν κάτι που “θα τους λύσει τα χέρια” ενώ στην πραγματικότητα θα τους τα κάνει περισσότερο κόμπο:

“Every time someone automates part of my job I end up with more work to do – but it is more interesting work.”

Υπάρχει ταβάνι και ίσως και διέξοδος κι εγώ θέλω πολύ να κάνω λάθος σε αυτή μου την προσέγγιση.

Sometimes Santa visits you through the Net

In discussions with @MrBoJensen we’ve concluded that most of the times virtual friends (people who we do not actually know) surprise us with their positive and supportive reactions. Yesterday I was to be surprised twice this way.

Through the Theory of Computing Blog Agreggator, I learned about “Security and Game Theory: Algorithms, Deployed Systems, Lessons Learned“. After seeing the price of the book, I tweeted:

New book on Security, Game Theory and Algorithms http://bit.ly/sBuUY4 | Pretty expensive for me though

At $64.99 the book carries the typical price from academic publishers. Which of course results in making knowledge contained in the book inaccessble, a contradiction to the very publication of a book. Really people someone has to make the Laffer curve for academic books, paper and textbook prices. Maybe you’ll understand. But I digress.

Minutes after I posted my complaint the Net responded. In my INBOX resided a gift of $64.99 to buy the book. A friend, a net friend whom I’ve never met but with who I’ve discussed various issues over the years and a mutual respect has grown between us, decided that I needed a Christmas present. THANK YOU Sakis. I am deeply moved.

Hours later yet another amazing gesture came. This time from a highly accomplished and respected Greek (a role model one would say). Again I stood speechless for a while trying to comprehend what had happened.

This is not the first time virtual friends have helped me out. But these two incidents forced me to publicaly thank them all because virtual friends never stop to amaze me. They make the Net a better place.

organized abandonment

shut it down

John D. Cook is reading “Inside Drucker’s Brain” and quoting stuff from it. I am reading the book of five questions, and it is my turn to quote Peter Drucker:

“Other people can do those activities and do them well. Maybe a few years ago it was a good idea for you to help get this farmers’ market started because those Vietnamese farmers in your area needed a place to sell their produce; but it’s going well now, and you don’t have to run it anymore. It’s time for organized abandonment”.

As system administrators we manage organized complexity. When systems outlive their scope, organized abandonment is the way to go. Unmaintained legacy systems is what we get for not planning so.

A vision so noble

Vasilis Katos at the 1st Athens Chapter ISACA Conference argued that we do not need cyber security experts, rather we need champions on the multitude of the different and complex areas that this domain encloses. He is not alone in believing this about experts. With the domain being new, hot and with commitment from Governments for financial backing of projects, the landscape is open for expertship claim. And since we are at the infant stages, many try to establish themselves as the strategists who set the pace, no matter how disconnected from reality they may be.

Whenever a new domain is introduced, until it is sufficiently comprehended people try to use analogies to make the connection. It is a no brainer then that since anything colored “cyber” starts to get a military approach, analogies with highly successful strategists of the past and relevant studies of them will appear. Think of it: Sun Tzu seems to fit every subject, from the battle ground, to sports, to (non military) management. I’ve seen efforts for both Sun Tzu (although far from a complete treatment) and Clausewitz and I am sure that others exist too. It is no wonder then that John Boyd and his OODA Loop would receive treatment too.

Since I found the OODA Loop concept interesting I set out to learn a bit more about it. This is not an easy task for a civilian for Boyd did not really leave much written work behind with the exception of a continually refined set of slides that when finalized took about 15 hours to present. To understand the loop, I read “A vision so noble” by Dan Ford. It’s chapter 2 contains a longer explanation of the OODA Loop than Wikipedia does and even includes a hand written sketch of it:

The OODA Loop as John Boyd sketched it toward the end of his life

For a more understandable version of the loop see the Wikipedia drawing and article.

Boyd is mostly an attacker and not a defender and indeed one can find cyber similarites in his work, where in page 40 Ford uncovered from his boxes:

Infiltration
* Blitz and guerrillas infiltrate a nation or regime at all levels to soften and shatter the moral fiber of the political, economic and social structure. To carry out this program, a la Sun Tzu, Blitz and Guerrillas:

* Probe and test adversary to unmask strenghts, weaknesses, maneuvers and intentions.

* Shape adversary’s perception of the world to manipulate or undermine his plans and actions.

Purpose
* To force capitulations when combined with external political, economic and military pressures.

or

* To minimize the resistance of a weakened foe for the military blows to follow.

Do not all the above match Cyber Warfare aims? So there exists value in studying Boyd and his tactics, but not a one-to-one mapping as many would hope that would make the transition to a cyber domain easier. The OODA Loop is there, one has to understand that it is not completely linear (OODA means Observation, Orientation, Decision, Action but you are constantly in an observation state that provides feedback) and is valuable.

Boyd believed that People not weapons win wars. Not very far from the observation that a good friend has made that people and not machines get hacked or my belief that people are the actual cyber weapons.

A good 70 page book based on Ford’s MSc Thesis that definitely helps expand our thoughts on the matter.

Off to read “The Dynamic OODA Loop: Amalgamating Boyd’s OODA Loop and the Cybernetic Approach to Command and Control” now.

PS1: An earlier version of Ford’s book seems to be available on Lulu as PDF.

PS2: Boyd on management

on management

“a contract, hence an agreement, between superior and subordinate. The subordinate agrees to make his actions serve his supervisor’s intent in terms of what is to be accomplished, while the superior agrees to give his subordinate wide freedom to exercise his imagination and initiative in terms of how intent is to be realized.”

John Boyd, Patterns of Conflict, slide 76.

“There will be blood”

Jeffrey Carr concludes his 2012 cyber predictions by writing:

“The very worst part of this prediction is that its inevitable. CEOs typically refuse to act to protect their own companies if it cuts into profit. The U.S. government has refused to do what’s necessary to protect our nation’s critical infrastructure because it’s 90% privately owned, and our laws and system of government has enabled this massive malfeasance so that everyone responsible can claim absence of malice. In the words of Upton Sinclair and the movie based upon his book Oil! – “there will be blood”. It’s just a matter of time”.

What is missing is the State’s ability to run the show. Had the State the ability to run the show, it would not have been that much dependent on such a fragile operation mode for the critical infrastructure. But as it is a waste to maintain an idle workforce capable of “doing the job” while actually not doing it (the other option being running the show, which also means a totally different kind of economy), Government resorts to regulation which again is problematic, since there cannot exist a Good Regulator (the Good Regulator can run the show; how many regulatory authorities actually can?) again this is problematic. To counter the problem new rules are placed on top of older ones and thus the Regulatorium emerges.

Blood? The Critical Infrastructure interdependencies are no less complex than the global Economy (imagine the CIP of a nation being attacked because it exports energy to another which is the actual target) so it is going to be rivers of it.

“με μηδενικό κόστος”

Διαβάζω αυτό:

“Τα στοιχεία θα καταχωρισθούν σε ειδική ηλεκτρονική βάση δεδομένων που κατασκεύασαν τα στελέχη Πληροφορικής του υπουργείου Διοικητικής Μεταρρύθμισης, η οποία δημιουργήθηκε με μηδενικό κόστος «πάνω» στην πλατφόρμα της Google.”

και αυτό (Security Problems with U.S. Cloud Providers):

“I think these are legitimate concerns. I don’t trust the U.S. government, law or no law, not to spy on my data if it thought it was a good idea. The more interesting question is: which government should I trust instead?”

Υπάρχει ΠΑΝΤΑ κόστος.-

→ Report: Patriot Act Fears Squash UK Defense Company’s Microsoft Cloud Plan.