From bike design to security design

You recall my posts from a couple of days ago (various), and here, and have studied the underlying Dutch Granny Bike Theory (as here), while not being put off by the lack (?) of design when taking a concrete view here.
You may also recall discussions, forever returning as long as security (control) design existed even when not (yet) as a separate subject, that users’ Desire Paths (exepelainifyed here) would inevitably be catered for or one would find continual resistance until failure — with opposition from the Yes But Users Should Be Made Aware Of Sensitivity Of Their Dealing With Commensurate (Linearly Appropriate) Security Hindrance side; things are hard for a reason and one should make things as simple as possible but not simpler. [Yeah, I know that’s a reformulation of Ockam’s Razor for simpletons outside of science and having dropped the scientific precision of O and of application to science where it’s valid and the second part is often lost by and on the most simpletons of all short of politicians which are in a league of their own.]

I feel there may be a world a.k.a. whole field of science, to be developed (sic) regarding this. Or at least, let’s drop the pretension of simpleness of cost/benefit calculations that are a long way on the very, very wrong side of but not simpler.
Anyone have pointers to some applicable science in this field?

Oh, and:
DSCN3655[Applicable to security design: “You understand it when you get it” © Johan Cruyff; Toronto]

The 46th

When Ford can launch the 2018 model of the Mustang already in January 2017, wouldn’t the People of the US not be able to already launch the improved-at-about-all-points 46th president, please ..!?
Similarly, I’d be happy already when someone(s) could have their infosec product / methodologies for 2018 out indeed per Jan ’17, so one’s protected against current threats rather than have to wait till next year before being able to be protected against the threats of today; always lagging.

Similarly, this:
DSC_0042[Gloomy and unprotected, ravaged, by not having the 46th yet; NY]

You Don’t Call The Shots

I.E., You Are Not In Control !

This, as a consequence of the ‘In Control’ definition. Where the controlling and ‘steering’ (what Steering Committees are about, if properly functioning … ) are the same.
But as explained previously, such steering doesn’t happen (is impossible) already in a Mediocristan world its complexity, let alone the mix-in (to say the least) with Extremistan that you’ll find everywhere and certainly in your business.

NO you can risk-manage your business to the hilt, or even make it extremely brittle, antiresilient by totalitarian bureaucracy that leaves no human breathing space but switches to full 100% bot-run enterprise, DAO-style ops (hence will fail with complete certainty when interacting with humans like, e.g., your clients),
because complete risk-managed stuff still weighs costs so is imperfect or isn’t…
And of the imperfection of fully-reactive quod non-‘security’, see the above and many of my previous posts…

So either way, things will happen that you didn’t order. Estimates run from 50-50 (where you have zero clue about which 50 you do control) to 90%, 95%, 99% not-your-call shots. The latter category since your brain is not wired [link: huh] to deal with more than 10% ‘free will’ and the rest is, as scientifically determined, reactive to the environment however clever and deep-minded you think yourself to be (the more the latter, the less you are … If you have to say you are wise, you aren’t). Which make the majority of what happens to you and your organisation, accidental and from the outside. Which is by the very definition not you being ‘in control’.

Despite all the ‘GRC’ liars that should be called out for that quality.

[Edited after scheduling, to add: In this here piece, there are very, very useful pointers to break away from the dismal Type I and II In Control (quod non) Statements of all shades. Should be studied, and seen to refer back to the foundations of auditing ..!]

Oh, and:
DSC_1033[Designed to belittle humans — failing since they’re still there…; DC]

On your own, or forever be weak

Just a note that ‘cyber’security vendors (that hate #ditchcyber) will not save you whatever their claims are. Because they live off the perpetuation of the problem, and will make you weaker by lack of upkeep of your strengths at whatever levels they were.
Just a note that this applies to ‘intelligent’ devices of whatever sorts, too. Like, The Shallows squared; Home voice-recognising butlering devices (is there a category name for those already? The Echo’s, Alexia’s, Home’s I mean) or the bots out there on the ‘net, self-driving cars, etc.etc.

So, ed-ju-cay-shun is still to be pursued, in all directions! And:
DSC_0711
[Yes art education as well, to not skew your persepctive…; DC sculpture garden]

Hoog op Flut! Alweer, inclusief Laag op Nut

Onderstaande, alweer, nog steeds… Inclusief de toevoeging (sic; aan deze tekst) dat een en ander (of gewoon een) stevig wordt verergerd qua domweg (sic) On-gezond, door een stellend gebrek aan (NB) voldoende groente — reden? hooguit dat de Cock geen idee heeft hoe hij (…) daarmee moet omgaan terwijl dat bij de basics hoort, toch? Dan maar volgemieterd met nog een pak ..:

Kan de gezamenlijke restaurantwereld in NL nou eens ophouden met die nonsens van “Hoog Op Smaak” en gewoon toegeven dat er door iedere gang een AKZO-jaaromzet zout gaat omdat de ingrediënten zó goedkoop moesten dat er geen enkele smaak aan zat ..?

[Edited to add: Nog erger als koks gaan beweren niet zo veel zout toe te voegen maar de smaak ‘umami’ maken. Een emmer MSG erbij gooien bedoelen ze dan. De betekenis en vertaling van ‘umami’ was tot voor kort ‘van alles veel’. Toch vreemd, dat we sinds de Romeinen vissaus kennen, vol van ‘umami’-glutamaten en afgeleiden, maar dat we nooit een woord ervoor hadden, of het als smaak bestempelden. Maar ja, het tikt vele receptoren aan hè? Dus het kan geen variant zijn van een van de vier basissmaken ..? Net als marsepein een aparte smaak is tenslotte, want naast heel veel zoet zit er ook een klein beetje andere smaak bij dus zoet op zich is marsepein niet ..?? Iemand een uitleg waar ‘basis’ voor staat in basissmaken ..?
En dat zout en ‘umami’ zo’n beetje hetzelfde effect hebben … Inderdaad, ze hebben beide het effect van smaakkoppoetsing door papillenactivering. Nou en?
Door met wat er al stond; lees aldaar dus MSG als :]

Heel triest om te zien dat ook vele ‘sterren’koks et al., zich er zo consequent aan bezondigen. Goede ingrediënten hebben geen volle Dode Zee / chemiefabriek nodig om smaakvol te zijn. Die sterren zijn ze echt niet waard. Tot nu toe slechts zegge 1 (schrijve: één) (ja ik weet het, zucht) Michelin-ster tegengekomen (i.e., geproefd) die de ster ook echt waard was. De rest (t/m 3*!): Nee hoor; effectbejag met een over de hele dichtgepletterde poging tot ‘umami’ door alle eigenheid aan smaak van de ingrediënten weg te poetsen met 3651 vrachtwagenladingen natriumchloride. Waar waren die sterren ook alweer voor? Toch niet alleen om ze als zodanig te voelen, waar de zon nooit schijnt, na beschikbaarstelling aan de keurmeesters van die bandenleverancier? Want het keukenproduct … oh zo vaak middelmatig, zeer middelmatig. Er is ook een neveneffect

Dit soort proletarische vervoosde degeneratie-decadentie staat natuurlijk naast natuurlijk een flink aantal niet-sterrententen die het begrepen hebben ‘maar daardoor geen ster halen’. Die gewoon weten hoe je de kwaliteit van ingrediënten kan halen zonder die te vernietigen, door te beginnen met goede ingrediënten en die geen geweld aan te doen. Als de (on)geachte cliëntèle dat niet proeft: Pech. Move over. Ga maar naar de Schotse keten, daar pep je de boel maar op met ketchup en mayo. Dá’s pas smaak, toch …!?

Zout kan je er niet uit halen, wel erin als je aan tafel zo nodig moet laten blijken te grof te zijn voor finesse.

Enfin, zo kan ik nog wel doorgaan. Rest, voor nu:
DSC_0217
[Sombertjes; hoog daarboven, op de schouders/berg, een ruïne, beneden rest een zoete kledder (gemiddeld); Ribeauvillé]

Pres

We’re one month into it, and reminded [this post scheduled 11-1 for release today; obviously true nevertheless] of what Douglas Adams had in The Hitchhikers’ Guide:

Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

(Yes quite the cite-quote of Groucho Marx’ maxim…)
But nobody noticed…

Plus:
cewvkwbwgaazfs2
[You didn’t know which 11-1 I mentioned ..? (Not) the relevant one…!]

Four Cyber

Where a Big 4 consultancy (or rather, a hang-on-by-the-teeth-fourth intensive-people(?)-farming accountancy-wannabe-advisory) now has a (unit) label “Cyber”. Where #ditchcyber (here) hardly helps… ‘Cyber’ is like being a lady; when you say it of yourself, you aren’t. This qualifier as head of a Linked List — you didn’t need the link to get the wink or did you? — a very long list it is. How desperate can one be to maintain extortionist fee levels and labour practices, to have to label yourself so empty-barreled ..?

I’ll halt now, and:DSC_0700 (2)[Or, like a dolphin not leggard]

White Mannism

The baby with the bath water.

Slate: “Glamour just published its first issue completely produced by women. It’s about time.” Meh. Check. Move on.
Some agency trying to find a diversity manager: Probably only non-white mentally and/or physically challenged LBGTQ ‘persons’ need apply ..?

Now the politics (mostly, of the PC kind; as completely isolated and locked up it was in its cultural-economic elite without real power) slowly finds that the Trumpists (or ~, fill in your European ‘OMG he (sic) doesn’t play by the over-ritualised pastel crayon coloured emptybabbletalk schemes’ overly-labeled-xenophobe polls-moonshooter) aren’t the Angry White Men that the (tell-tale) rushed qualification need (fear fo being found out not to have any insight, maybe?) had thought them to be,
it is time to also consider even more sobering. In the area of: No, I can’t help being a white man I’m just born that way. And raised, by the way, in an environment that worked towards imprinting penalty for that already. To think that I don’t know this, don’t notice, or unconsciously or consciously abuse the privilege because some have attached the idea that I have that to me, unwantingly, is a scam and demonstrates that those involved, in fact do NOT know me but it demonstrates as well their limited world view of trying to lock up all they meet (or not even) in extremely limited confines of classification. If that’s your need, you have other problems than your supposed underprivileged childhood so maybe use your lifetime trying to grow a pair (F/M)?
This translates into: If you care to hire such a diversity manager as mentioned above, you demonstrate to want a token woman. If you care that some women’s magazine (yeah, I do realise that, sigh.) is finally made by women only, you consider no man capable of understanding women ..? Are you helping by trying to avoid that? Did you check all suitable male candidates for their inability to deliver the quality you need? (My guess: at the printer’s, there’s quite a few men working there, by the way) Or do you care less for quality than for gender accidentally (!) fixed at birth or medical facility?
Again, being born white male, does that mean I’m less because I’m supposedly ‘privileged’ …? If the (medically) colourblind can’t tell red from green, are others privileged and discriminating (usually taken to mean the one and the other are inseparable somehow) and shouldn’t be allowed to ever use those colours?
(Apart from some, rare, groups seriously trying to undercut common superstitions; I like those — as far as they see the limits of their purpose and stretch)

Or do you want to change the world by practicing what you preach?

There’s anger for you. Anger for being told why one is supposedly stupid for reasons of not seeing and recognising one’s stupidity. There’s why the protests by voters (the ultimate source of power, it shows, and of authority in our world) are from all those not in command. Re-read Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man again; you’ll only have to add ‘self-righteous PC babbling airheads’ [disclaimer: I’m one, too] (in)to ‘government’ and you see where the current set of politicians went off the rails.
By the way, don’t be fooled by the tone of the above: I’m not even angry! Just sad and disappointed. And unhopeful about the future [ _ | for me ].

Now, there’s also the Age thing … like, this and you’re aiming for sheeple not experience…

Oh, plus:
DSC_0854
[Classical burden; this, for Heroes — Arlington]

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord