And the lesson is?

That is at times the issue and it does at times get help from people, managers mainly that belief that the need for speed rectifies everything, which of course is delusional to say the least. So, last week there was a news flash that was speeding across the retina’s of my eyes and I initially ignored it, mainly because it was Samsung and we do not get along. But then Tom’s guide (at https://www.tomsguide.com/news/samsung-accidentally-leaked-its-secrets-to-chatgpt-three-times) and I took a closer look. The headline ‘Samsung accidentally leaked its secrets to ChatGPT — three times!’ was decently satisfying. The rest “Samsung is impressed by ChatGPT but the Korean hardware giant trusted the chatbot with much more important information than the average user and has now been burned three times” seemed icing on the cake, but I took another look at the information. You see, to all ChatGPT is seen as an artificial-intelligence (AI) chatbot developed by OpenAI. But I think it is something else. You see, AI does not exist, as such I see it as an ‘Intuitive advanced Deeper Learning Machine response system’, this is not me dissing OpenAI, this system when it works is what some would call the bees knees (and I would be agreeing), but it is data driven and that is where the issues become slightly overbearing. In the first you need to learn and test the responses on data offered. It seems to me that this is where speed driven Samsung went wrong. And Tom’s guide partially agrees by giving us “unless users explicitly opt out, it uses their prompts to train its models. The chatbot’s owner OpenAI urges users not to share secret information with ChatGPT in conversations as it’s “not able to delete specific prompts from your history.” The only way to get rid of personally identifying information on ChatGPT is to delete your account — a process that can take up to four weeks” and this response gives me another thought. Whomever owns OpenAI is setting a data driven stage where data could optionally be captured. More important the NSA and likewise tailored organisations (DGSE, DCD et al) could find the logistics of these accounts, hack the cloud and end up with TB’s of data, if not Petabytes and here we see the first failing and it is not a small one. Samsung has been driving innovation for the better part of a decade and as such all that data could be of immense value to both Russia and China and do not for one moment think that they are not all over the stage of trying to hack those cloud locations. 

Of course that is speculation on my side, but that is what most would do and we don’t need an egg timer to await actions on that front. The final quote that matters is “after learning about the security slip-ups, Samsung attempted to limit the extent of future faux pas by restricting the length of employees’ ChatGPT prompts to a kilobyte, or 1024 characters of text. The company is also said to be investigating the three employees in question and building its own chatbot to prevent similar mishaps. Engadget has contacted Samsung for comment” and it might be merely three employees. Yet in that case the party line failed, management oversight failed and Common Cyber Sense was nowhere to be seen. As such there is a failing and I am fairly certain that these transgressions go way beyond Samsung, how far? No one can tell. 

Yet one thing is certain. Anyone racing to the ChatGPT tally will take shortcuts to get there first and as such companies will need to reassure themselves that proper mechanics, checks and balances are in place. The fact that deleting an account takes 4 weeks implies that this is not a simple cloud setting and as such whomever gets access to that will end up with a lot more than they bargained for.

I see it as a lesson for all those who want to be at the starting signal of new technology on day one, all whilst most of that company has no idea what the technology involves and what was set to a larger stage like the loud, especially when you consider (one source) “45% of breaches are cloud-based. According to a recent survey, 80% of companies have experienced at least one cloud security incident in the last year, and 27% of organisations have experienced a public cloud security incident—up 10% from last year” and in that situation you are willing to set your data, your information and your business intelligence to a cloud account? Brave, stupid but brave.

Enjoy the day