Tag Archives: spoofing

Confusion speaks its mind

So here I was, one day in the past and I see a BBC article. I saw the headline, I saw the ‘bully approach’ and initially I ignored it. It was not the BBC, there was no setting that seemingly truly interested me. I was thinking of a few settings towards IP that could give Apple (and optionally Meta) a nice boost. As I was mulling over the ideas I was having, in comes the CBC about 10 hours ago, or better stated I noticed their article and now something clicks in my mind. I started rereading the two articles. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn48jj3y8ezo) gives us ‘Trump orders government to stop using Anthropic in battle over AI use’ with ““We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Friday.” Of course if he doesn’t want it, there must be a good reason why people might want to use it and we are given “Anthropic is mired in a row with the White House after refusing demands that it agree to give the US military unfettered access to its AI tools. The refusal led US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth to say he’s deemed Anthropic a “supply chain risk”.” And we are given the quandary that there should be some clarity. The idea that the US Military has unrestrained or uninhibited access to any AI is dangerous. And that is merely to look at it from THEIR point of view. We saw over the last 5 years a few examples where Pentagon staff used whatever USB key they had optionally opening their systems to backdoors and this can result in several ways where the Pentagon would be affected including: Human Interface Device (HID) Spoofing, Malware Infection via Social Engineering, Exploiting OS Vulnerabilities or Juice Jacking (Compromised Public Ports/Cables) and a few other ways. Even in this decade more than one system seemingly ended up on the danger list. So, ‘someone’ now wants to grant AI unfettered access which opens the doors to AI accessing data involves sophisticated, automated, and often, continuous interaction between intelligent systems and vast data sources, including internal corporate databases, cloud storage, and public web content. It constitutes a critical, high-speed, and high-stakes component of the modern AI ecosystem that raises significant security and privacy challenges. And this is not some ‘fear mongering’ There is a lot of AI works that is still to be considered and because AI doesn’t exist and this is all DML on several layers that interact there are dangers to be seen. As we saw a mere week ago that Microsoft had to ‘confess’ that it had accessed confidential emails of Microsoft users. Now consider this happening on a serious level in the Pentagon. It has well over 50,000 desktop computers within its building, with reports from 2014 indicating at least 18,000 were part of specific virtualized infrastructure. Now consider that we have seen the accusation of “Based on reports in early 2025 and 2026, OpenAI has accused Chinese AI startup DeepSeek of “inappropriately” distilling, or copying, the capabilities of OpenAI’s models (specifically ChatGPT and its reasoning models like o1) to train its own competing, low-cost models (such as DeepSeek-R1)”. As such, the dangers of unfettered access can go in two directions and that sets the bar of distilling from the Pentagon a lot lower than anyone could find acceptable. As such there is every chance that Russia is already considering the massive win they could gain once the unfettered access could merely hit one system that was transgressed upon. Because the greedy and the stupid will do anything to propel the setting of self, whilst not caring what others could gain in that setting as well.

So whilst some will consider the dangers of “The company said that “designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk would be an unprecedented action — one historically reserved for US adversaries, never before publicly applied to an American company.” Anthropic said the “designation would both be legally unsound and set a dangerous precedent for any American company that negotiates with the government.”” No one seems to be considering that the opposite is a lot more dangerous. So whilst some focus on the stage of “Anthropic had said it sought narrow assurances from the Pentagon that its AI chatbot Claude would not be used for mass surveillance of Americans or in fully autonomous weapons. The Pentagon said it was not interested in such uses and would only deploy the technology in legal ways, but it also insisted on access without any limitations. The government’s effort to assert dominance over the internal decision-making of the company comes amid a wider clash over AI’s role in national security and concerns about how increasingly capable machines could be used in high-stakes situations involving lethal force, sensitive information or government surveillance. Trump said Anthropic made a mistake trying to strong-arm the Pentagon. He wrote on Truth Social that most agencies must immediately stop using Anthropic’s AI but gave the Pentagon a six-month period to phase out the technology that is already embedded in military platforms.” As I personally see it, it is the accumulation of stupid and technologically ignorant all combined in one package. And that is before we get to mass surveillance. You see combine mass surveillance with data distilling and the United States of America will be handing the data on 349 million Americans straight to China and Russia. This is not AI, this is DML. That means it comes with the hangups and limitations of a programmer. So when this goes wrong it goes wrong in a massive way. 

As such what will people like President Trump and Pete Hegseth say? Do they think that the response ‘Oops’ will cover it?

So whilst CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-anthropic-feud-ai-9.7109006) gives us “U.S. President Donald Trump, U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and other officials took to social media to chastise Anthropic for failing to allow the military unrestricted use of its AI technology by a Friday deadline, accusing it of endangering national security after CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns the company’s products could be used in ways that would violate its safeguards.” And this is the setting we expect to see and it will be the undoing of several people, because as I see it “U.S. President Donald Trump, U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and other officials” is the start of what comes next. You see, the internet doesn’t forget and these ‘other officials’ have sealed their fate with this action and there is no ‘He told me to do that’ they were instrumental in assisting to hand over the data of the population of the United States of America to optionally both China and Russia. Do you feel safe now?

And in response to this setting we see “The dispute stunned AI developers in Silicon Valley, where venture capitalists, prominent AI scientists and a large number of workers from Anthropic’s top rivals — OpenAI and Google — voiced support for Amodei’s stand in open letters and other forums.” And that should have been a clear message that the competition was on the side of Amodei, so, why would that be? Whilst people in the Pentagon (seemingly) forgot about that router with password ‘Cisco123’ there is every chance that these DML engines will be cleverly distilled by people controlling systems like DeepSeek and whatever the Russians have. I should buy another egg timer, because this is a setting that might gain me a few coins, especially as several people are blind to the danger that is coming for them. And consider one additional setting. It is said that:

So what happens when distilling comes with an additional insertion of data? I can’t wait for that setting to lose balance and the training data in American data centers start losing authentication and reliability markers. But that is  likely a story for another day.

Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Real life in virtuality

The other night I was pondering the setting (as you might have read in the previous blog) on RPG’s and the setting of a dream within a dream. The idea took another turn as I was considering the interaction of reality with virtuality, and in this a game based on a 1 exabyte setting, an online multiplayer game based on virtuality. A game where players fight each other, they create alliances and they conquer. To get this done, we either create a world that is believable, or we turn it around and let the world create our reality. 

And as I was pondering this, I remember a game called ‘Virus’, in this shooter the game created the levels depending on your hard-drive, that was when the cogs clicked together. 

The new game an entire exabyte of challenges.

The world where we are thrown into is not unlike TRON, but in this setting we become citizens of a cloud environment, we are kidnapped and as we scape we end up getting left to our own devices. So as such we see a challenge, but consider a cloud environment, one that has a dozen Fortune 500 companies, thousands of mid sized companies and a lot more small companies. So will you take on a large player, or do you start small? A game with settings unlike we have ever seen and it is a game that develops further as more players sink into a company, a game without a timeline, but with time as either an ally or an enemy. A stage we have (as far as I know) never seen before and as the cloud evolves, so does the world and the enemies we face. So consider creating a cloud environment for that event and turning it into a game, we are always looking for a challenge, so why not become the infecting part and take over companies, corporations and grow in that way and this is the game with a difference, it is hard core only, one life! You can restart as often as you want, but one defeated you start at square one, until you have complete control of your first company, corporation or enterprise. So as we see and as we get into one cloud, it will be close to an all out war with anyone you face, that is unless you can strike an alliance, and alliances require all parties to see the benefit of one another. The nice part here is that this might (or might not) be the stage where we either love it or hate it. You see this will not appeal to all, there is no doubt it is, yet how can we create the challenge of such a game? We appeal to the player and we set the event that the player will embrace. An approach where the benefit of both sledgehammer and scalpel are seen, and the creation of an environment where both can thrive. And that is the challenge, creating the environment where everything piece of hardware is shown as something, where every router and its components are shown as challenges, I wonder if it can be done.

The question
Yes, I do ask myself the question if it is feasible, if it is even remotely possible. You see, we all have Monday morning quarterbacks in one end, but the other end is also taken. Usually by some manager that has a new plan every Monday morning, but it never pans out to be possible, achievable or even deeply contemplated. I see that, I always question my own thoughts, you see the person who does not question their own thoughts ends up drawing castles in the sky, and then expects a dot matrix printer to print a 1200 DPI photograph. We must question ourselves at all times, especially when we caress our creative side. 

So is my idea a castle in the sky? Perhaps it is, there is no doubt on that. Yet for every 8-10 failures, that one idea will push through and become a real winner. In 1997 I opted and idea to my bosses to use a marketing strategy that used websites as the central core for reaching out to others, my bosses laughed, stating that there was no business model for something that delusional, and stupid me, I listened, 4 years before Facebook, I had the idea for a digital marketing path and it was ignored, silly stupid me, as such I am putting ALL my ideas on the public domain, some will find ground, some will not, perhaps most will not, yet in this I am setting the stage for some to take the idea and push it into a direction that I am currently unable to pursue, for a few reasons, but I digress.

We can try to literally translate a cloud, or we can set the inventory of any given cloud and create a converted one that boggles the mind. Consider that a company has a server, users, computers, routers, Cloud Connectors, Data Center Interconnect Platforms, Mobile Internet Routers and a few other devices, and the larger the company becomes, the larger the hardware and that is before the cloud, in the cloud we see all kind of other issues and to map these out we need a different set of rules, a different set of limits to add to the game, to give some version of ‘reality’ to the game, a set of spawning rules (I hate spawning in games) or to set a better stage, if a cloud is represented in elements (see image) now consider that each company has larger or smaller elements of all, how diverse will be the challenge a gamer has, even as the gamer goes from place to place, he is still in one cloud and there is the larger cloud security to content with. Perhaps the game is a fools errant, yet I believe that if gaming is the edge of technology, the only way we get beyond what we have now, is to push the stage of a new game towards and beyond the horizon of what we now can see. Sony gave us the console to do it, so let’s push into a realm we have never seen before, it is the only way to keep gaming at the height of any system, if we do not do that, we are hopelessly lost.

So where is your virtual gaming life? In a new version of an existing game, or in a stage of gaming we haven’t seen yet? I have nothing against the next iteration in gaming, I played Tombraider, 1, 2 and 3 and never regretted that, yet even there, we saw evolution of gaming. That part was less and less visible in some other franchises and that is a sad part, because only those who push gaming beyond the limits will show a game worthy of conquering. We have all kind of views on this, some hate them, some love them and that is OK. I was never a GTA fan, but a lot are, some hate Watchdogs 2, I loved it (3 as well). Some love Breakpoint, me not that much. That is fine, I always state that those claiming to create a game that appeals to all, will create a game that pleases none, so if I am not part of any equation, that is fine by me. Others, will serve the game I like. 

This is how it should be and in all this creativity will push limits and creativity will open up other doors, such is life and we need to push as many doors as we can if we are to make life better all around us, the iterators never will, they are part of the margin spreadsheet, sailing a safe course to last longer, it will never ever go their way. Nintendo is perhaps one of the shiniest examples. It pushed the Wii, which was a decent success, then the WiiU, an abysmal failure, yet it resulted in the Nintendo Switch, an absolute home run in gaming and there we see that failings will optionally turn to wins, an iterator will never see that, only the innovator will get there. Nintendo at present is close to 75,000,000 switch consoles sold, that implies 2 Nintendo’s for every Xbox, so where is their ‘most powerful system in the world’ now? Iterators always have a good story, but they do not yield results, we will get another ‘We’re not driven by how many consoles we sell, it is the same all over, the losers will say the numbers are shallow, but when they are in pole position, it is everything. A brand gone to the dogs, largely because they ignored the voice of the gamer, I saw that almost a decade ago. And now we see a new world rising, one run by Sone ind Nintendo, it is fine by me, although I needed Microsoft to keep Sony on their toes, this idea will soon be a bust. So the best I can do is to set a stage of creativity and hope that some will Create more and more Sony exclusive games, those who do will be able to use my gaming IP free of charge, I do have commercial needs (income) for my 5G IP, such is life and I do like to enjoy a good meal.

So is my cloud game a bust? Perhaps it is, but for now I will try to envision more and more of that approach, consider a complete created cloud, one where you travel and set the premise of ruling the cloud, yet not alone, it is too big making alliances more and more important, a stage that several have attempted, some a lot more successful then others, I merely want to add to the success rate, or at least attempt to do so. It is the price of creativity and its push to innovation, only the successful continue that battle stronger, the failures continue too, but on a smaller scale, and that is fine, every person will fail at some point, it is what they do next that matters, because Steve Jobs had its successes, but he also had the NeXT computer. We recognise success, but we fail to recognise the failures and where they lead to, it is the flaw in many of us. And this is a larger stage, so how can we set that stage, when people keep on pushing Microsoft and their Blue solution. So as ZDnet reported “Microsoft acknowledged it was a service update targeting an internal validation test ring that caused a crash in Azure AD backend services. “A latent code defect in the Azure AD backend service Safe Deployment Process (SDP) system caused this to deploy directly into our production environment, by passing our normal validation process,” officials said”, a lot of bla bla and yada yada, yet the flaw is not merely within Microsoft, it is the same approach that is replicated again and again. So as we see mentions of Active Directory, we also see ‘a validation ring that doesn’t include customer data’, as well as ‘the SDP didn’t correctly target the validation ring due to a defect and all rings were targeted concurrently causing service availability to degrade’, so how long until there are more and more failures and the rollback merely adds to the problem? This is what I saw when I considered the NSA approach towards Trust Zero, the idea is good, but larger players will screw up making any rollback a much larger issues over the whole field. This is part of the idea to make the cloud a game, we could optionally see something we never noticed before, because thousands of gamers will kick the one part everyone ignored. 

Whether we see the issue in reality, or merely virtual. We need to look with different kind of glasses, I see that because 20 years ago I listened to the wrong people, those relying on bullet points, memo’s and ego. There is no space for that in gaming, or in innovative design, I wonder when Microsoft will figure that part out, they are now in 3rd position, what happens when they become deal last (behind Amazon), will they blame metrics or will it be a Covid set of variables? No matter what they will rely on, they are in a stage where they are losing more and more slices of business cake, they are losing slices in a time where they should have had the entire pie, as I personally see it stupidity, greed driven short sightedness and ego driven conviction made them lose field after field, and now they are in a ratchet state, they have no ability to get close to Amazon and at the same time there is every chance that Google could catch up with them. When that happens, Microsoft will be holding a losing hand in the both the cloud and the gaming field and as their surface solution falls short, we see them handing over slices of that pie to Apple, a three sided losing streak, it is a rare but slightly satisfying field. Why do I think that Microsoft will fail? ZDnet stated it best with “There is still no publicly available data on Azure sales. Azure is the part of Microsoft’s cloud business that most rhymes with AWS, but is buried in the commercial cloud”. In a lifetime of working in IT, I have learned that when commercial driven players rely on ‘no publicly available data’, it tends to be because someone is too close, they are too far behind, or the results create questions, and as I personally see it, Microsoft does all three, Google is too close, they are too far behind with Amazon and the Exchange server issues call in question issues with the Microsoft cloud as a whole. As we saw (from 2019 onwards) more and more hacks towards clouds, there is every notion that together with one source claiming that 90% of clouds are in danger, Microsoft has a lot is problems coming their way, I do not know if this is completely fair on Microsoft, as all three have issues, but the replicated approach Microsoft has (Active Directory anyone?), we see a larger issue, if hacks can be transposed from one system to the other, Microsoft hacks might be seen as lucrative (from the organised crime point of view), it makes the NSA approach more and more essential, yet I personally feel that any rollback has hidden flaws and flaws are a problem, especially in a cloud where one flaw transfers to a whole number of corporations. I will be the first to agree that my view is speculative, because it is, but to see that part you need to grasp back to 2003 where the people got “Erroneous VeriSign-Issued Digital Certificates Pose Spoofing Hazard”, this needs to happen only once on the cloud and the mess is almost complete and I believe that a rollback will make it happen. So how do you feel about ‘due to a defect and all rings were targeted concurrently’ now?

So perhaps my idea for a cloud game has a few additional benefits, apart from it being an interesting approach to a new game. 

Have a great day

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Science