Short post and quick opinion.

I came across some tweets today about how bad people are in the #infosec/#DFIR community and I dug a little deeper. Actually, I didn’t have to dig far at all to find truly negative things, things that I don’t typically see.  (*edit: this wasn't written about a current infosecdrama, but certainly can be applied to it)

DFIR Call-out culture

On the call-out culture in DFIR/infosec, aka “name and shame”, I liken it to a Game of Thrones style Walk of Shame. When the Internet is weaponized against someone, for any reason, justified or not, it’s not just a walk of shame, it is a walk of shame on a cocktail of meth and steroids, and carved in stone.

I don’t have any requests of anyone who chooses to participate in the call-out culture, simply because people will do what they are going to do regardless of any positive advice you want to give. For those, it will always be damn the consequences, to hell with long term negative effects, and so what to those hit as collateral damage.  I’m using the ‘call-out culture’  term as it applies to simply calling out anyone online to bash, shame, embarrass, ridicule, or troll because you are angry at something.

Stay above the fray

There is a reason that I don’t see these things online. I don’t look for them. I ignore them and certainly don’t follow them. I intently look for the positive. There are good people in the world, in every profession, just as there are not-so-good people in the world and in every profession. We each choose who to listen to, who to associate with, who to mentor, who to be mentored by, and who are our role models. We make our own beds by the choices we make. Make the wrong choices and you will see a lot of negativity that is amplified more than its reality.

To be honest, I have started this post several times over the past year, but I chose to not write it because of a fear of somehow being targeted in the culture that we developed in targeting ourselves. But I hope that the post helps someone, so I write it today.

Inciting fear, anger, and hate

Here is one example of what I am talking about: It is difficult to get the job that you really want. For some reason in the universe, no matter what job that you truly want, it is difficult to get. Sometimes it is impossible. Same with the school that you want to accept you.  I have no reason why this is, or maybe it is just me. Whatever story that you have on not getting what you truly wanted, I can one-up you on every count. Whatever story that you can give on not getting what you wanted because of something about you, I can one-up you on that too. We all suffer from some form of something that we had nothing to do with or have any control over that is used against us for some reason or another. All of us.

The thing is, when we tell each other that the world is against us because of something, like what you are (versus who you are), or some other reason, we do a disservice by discouraging hard work. By knocking someone down online, we discredit ourselves and the community. When we say, “The system is against you”, that roughly translates into “No matter what you do, you won’t win.”  Some of us, certainly a small percentage, dance in the muck of trolling others, embarrassing peers, creating untruths, and worse still, doxxing each other.

This negativity won’t go away, but you can choose to not listen, not be a part of those conversations, and push the positive, not push the narratives. And simply keep moving forward. Simply, by the way, does not mean easily.

I'm not trying to conflate the mentions that may unintentionally come across as negative with the intentionally negative comments found online. There is a difference in innocently saying something that may be misinterpreted and blatently calling someone/something out.

I see this sort of culture online, where some users are constantly spreading fear or generating anger, riding on any hot topic of the day. I just don't know what to say about those who are angry about something that affects no one but themselves. When they try to build an audience to support their cause of anger, by "calling out" some person or some group of people for some reason or another, the Internet magnifies someone's personal perception which in some cases, can be totally offbase. All I can suggest is to ignore those who do this because those who do this can't be reasoned with. Associate with eagles so that the turkeys don't hold you down.

Confrontation

Going directly to the source of an issue that you have with someone takes guts. You won’t get any ‘Internet social cred’ for not calling them out publicly, but you will get respect from the person or company that you confront. I have been in military and law enforcement units that the only way to solve a problem was to go straight to the person and talk; if you don’t talk to the source of your problem, shut up about it. Today, we see people hit every social media platform to take someone down on an issue that might not even be an issue, with long lasting (i.e., permanent) effects. Whether a justified injustice or perceived slight, the result is the same when the Launch-the-Internet-nukes button is pushed.

The contact information of nearly any person or company is blatantly open online. A simple email or DM might answer a question that you have, or clear up a misunderstanding that you or the other person may have. Maybe it won’t.  But I can tell you, when you slam a company or person online, it doesn’t matter if you were right (or self-righteous), or totally wrong. The damage is done to both your target and you as soon as it hits the interwebs.

Enough of this already

I will repeat something that I have said many times before. I remember every single person that helped me in every aspect of my life. Some have no idea that they were even a positive influence in my life, but I remember them as such. I remember them by name and by the very thing they helped me in achieving, overcoming, or most importantly, helping me survive.

One of these people, with whom I served with in the military, had a huge impact in me being positive in any situation. I’ll name him, because it is in the positive, as you will never see me call-out anyone in the negative.

So many years ago, when I was a young E-4, Sam Birky was my unit’s Chaplain, and was one of the most positive of anyone who I have ever met before or since then. Every minute speaking and every mile running with him affected me then through to today. You would think that looking at his demeanor and attitude that everything must have come naturally to him and nothing ever bad happened. If you thought that way about him, you would be totally wrong, yet he came across as one of the luckiest, happiest, and most positive people you can ever meet. If you are fortunate to have him tell you about his life, from serving in Vietnam, to its aftermath on him and family, and more that he has endured, you will see how someone can be better even when everything is at its worse. Those stories that he told me are mine, but for anyone who I ever helped, know that most likely that it was Sam Birky that helped you as I was just the middleman of Sam's goodwill and good advice.

As for those who held me back, pushed me down, sabotaged me, kicked me while I was down, stole from me, or spoke nothing but untruths….I remember you just as clearly, but not for any good thing. That’s all I will say about that.

My opinion to you is, be the person that is remembered like a Sam Birky. You will sleep better. The community will be better. In the end, you will be remembered, and not ignored. And the world around you will be a better place to be. That is all that matters today. Yesterday is gone, but we can work today to make ourselves better tomorrow, even if just a little bit (or byte) at a time.

*edit 4/26/19*

Some have asked, and this is the Sam Birky to which I refer (hint: he's the Col).

Admittedly, the title of this post is intentionally gross, because I am going to heave a few things at you, mainly about puking. As in, literally puking.

The inspiration for this post

I listened to a well-done presentation not too long ago, and afterward, I went to the restroom. When I walked in, I heard someone puking their guts out. It turned out to be the presenter. When he came out of the stall, looking all embarrassed, he said that it must have been something that he ate.

I told him that food probably had nothing to do with it, but more with the stress, pressure, anxiety, fear, and energy required to give the great presentation that he did. I realized after I said that, he was more nervous...

Then I told him that he’ll probably tango with the toilet again at another presentation. It’s just the way it is when you open yourself to a crowd of people. The fear of being judged, evaluated, critiqued, criticized, or being wrong is a lot for the stomach’s brain to handle. Of course, I immediately realized that I was making it worse after the words left my lips..

I said that sometimes I drive the porcelain bus when I give presentations (I have once, and I expect to do it again surely at some point). My advice was to let it flow when it comes, either before or after the presentation, and consider it a badge of honor that you truly put out your best effort for your audience and put yourself out there. You physically and mentally gave it your all because you exposed your entire self to a crowd of strangers. As a bit of comfort, I did say that I’ve not seen anyone hurl during a presentation, but I’m sure that can happen too. I didn’t tell him that at the time tho.

But can it happen to you? And should you ever risk speaking in public if so?

In my opinion, presentation-induced upchucking can happen to anyone from the most experienced presenters and the greenest of presenters. In DFIR, anyone, and I mean anyone, can find themselves on a stage for the first time in a young career or at any point of their career simply because they know something that others don’t. Maybe a small thing. Maybe a big thing. But your time in DFIR is irrelevant insofar as being able to speak to those in DFIR.

Also, it doesn’t matter the size of the audience or your competence level of your job that will determine if you will toss your cookies.

Ok. Let me give it to you on my ralph story.

My day-of-barf came at a presentation to a group of citizens on basic cyber security. The talk was a favor to a friend who organized the attendees. I gave it my all, as every time I do, but nothing extremely out of the ordinary. As soon as it was over, I felt a little queasy, and lost my lunch in the restroom. That was it. I did it once. When I stepped out the restroom, there was a small group of people staring at me and one asked if I was ok. Yep....they must have heard me...If you ever hear anything different, that was the story, and not a big deal. I would not be surprised to have it happen again, mostly because I care about giving an audience the information that they came to hear, in a manner that everyone benefits.  And I hope that my zipper is not done at the time…

I tell you this because no matter how many times you present, you may never know the one time that you end up revisting your breakfast afterward which has nothing to do with the number of presentations you have given. I have given presentations for more than 30 years to groups of less than 5 to rooms of more than 500 and I still ordered a buick in the restroom.

But this doesn’t mean to stop presenting when you have the opportunity. On the contrary, I hope it encourages more presentations from those who are so nervous that they would never think of standing on a stage to present a topic that so many people are waiting to hear.

If you are doing your best, and you care that you are connecting and giving a part of yourself to the audience, you are probably at risk of retching afterward. Consider it solid (albeit chunked) proof that you gave everything you had and that your audience received maximum output from your effort.

My intention with this post is that if you find yourself blowing chunks after a presentation, whether you were nervous or not, do not take that to mean you should not present anymore or that anything went wrong with your presentation (it probably as good as it gets). If I happen upon you as you make modern art in the toilet, I will know that I saw a presentation given at your best and you beared all to your audience.  Kudos to you.

By the way, I believe there to be three types of presenters:

• Those who have thrown up.
• Those who will throw up.
• Those who have thrown up but haven’t told anyone.

So......have you ever thrown up with one of your presentations? Don’t worry about it 😉

Lesley Carhart tweeted today that a journalist used one of her tweets in an article that would have been rephrased in a less playful manner had the journalist just asked. I find this tweet to be an extremely important tweet that affects many in forensics (see my side note on 'forensics'). 

Lesley's tweet was in an article about a national security lapse, or actually, several national security lapses. The incident described in the article is important on its face of national security, yet a journalist took a snarky tweet to validate the journalist's statements. Lesley was spot on with her tweet, as Leslie mentioned, she would have written a killer response that would be better for the journalist had the journalist just asked her.

TFW your shitposting tweet about infosec is so funny they just stick it in a serious and credible news article 🤷🏻‍♀️🍸

— Lesley Carhart (@hacks4pancakes) April 9, 2019

Let me take this a step further to get to the crux of this blog post on why many practitioners don't post opinions online 

"I am afraid of some attorney using my words against me. - unnamed DFIR expert" 

I have spoken to more than a few practicing DFIR folks about their decisions to not openly use social media to discuss DFIR, since that is the best way to get the fastest answers to problems. The common response is the fear of having a conment being used against them in a case, especially since they are perpectually under subpoena in one case or another.  Some of those who do post online comments are using anonymous accounts. They are afraid of their words being used against them in court, so they go the anonymous route, as if that will protect them from answering the question under oath, "Do you have any social media accounts where you discuss your work?"

This commonly stated reason of fear of any comment or comments being used against them in legal proceedings where they stand to be called as a witness is something that I totally get.

 A scenario that can play out is being a witness in a civil or criminal trial, undergoing cross examination, and past comments being brought into play as a means of discrediting the witness. With journalists and activists reaching back decades of online comments to discredit or embarrass someone, the legal arena is ripe for doing the same thing (I have seen it done). In some instances, this could be reasonable if full context is introduced, and even then, opinions are like fruit; they can be perishable as time goes by.

I've had a tweet of mine end up in a class action suit filing. While I stand by it (not a good idea to link to JavaScript from an ad domain that was abandoned years ago—and now repurposed by an attacker—in a production site), it made me rethink how I framed things.

— Kenn White (@kennwhite) April 9, 2019

The result is that we have an incredible amount of talent, experience, and knowledge in the forensic world that refuse to post any comments online for the fear of potentially having a comment being used maliciously or falsely in either expert qualification or cross examination.  The impact on the community is that we miss the most relevant and impactful resources that could move the community forward 100x, all because of fear of being quoted out of context.

Some people, for whatever reason, do not want to disclose where they work, as if having any job would be embarrassing anyway. So, they stay anonymous online. Again, I totally get it, but if you aren’t bashing your employer, disclosing intellectual property, or being disingenuous in what you say, do you need to be anonymous?

What we get then is a slew of anonymous accounts. We have anonymous practitioners and experts, who we have no idea of their qualifications or reputation, stating opinions on “DFIR” topics, which do not have the same impact as a named person. It’s anonymous, therefore, untrusted and unverifiable, even when coming from someone who is probably the best to state an opinion on the topic at hand. We just don’t know, therefore, almost pointless.

Reasons supportive of anonymous accounts

I understand the use of anonymous accounts when your personal safety is at risk, such as working in a field where you or your family could be targeted (and killed) because of your job, such as working undercover or for an intelligence agency hunting terrorists.  If you are only doing forensics, the odds of being targeted are quite low… How do I know this? Because when I worked undercover, where I was day-in and day-out hanging out with people who killed people, I never had my name online. I was also at the point of not having any social media presence at all (anonymous or not) for the sole reason of limiting risk of exposure to myself and family.

Other than that, I see no need to have an anonymous account other than for the ability to post anything, and I mean practically anything, without any risk of being personally called out for unreasonable, untruthful, or otherwise harmful opinions.  Unless an employer has a specific policy that an employee cannot have a personal social media account, then anonymity simply appears to be a manner to spout off without recourse.  I’m still looking for an employer that prohibits an employee from having a social media account…  But again, I get it. Anonymity is here to stay.

To the anonymous experts

Brett’s opinion: Anonymous accounts hold zero weight for opinions. It doesn’t matter how many retweets, shares, or favorites you get, anonymity is not credibility.  But if you put your name on your words, your words are heavy. For those working in the legal arena, especially those writing affidavits, you particularly know the weight of an anonymous complaint versus someone willing to have their name listed in a search warrant affidavit. 

Your word is to your honor as your name is to your reputation.

The things that we say (post/tweet/share) today will most likely exist forever. This by itself should be enough to make us at least read our words before posting them. Although I will admit, I will re-read what I just typed, post it, and then catch my grammar errors too late after the post…but for the content, I stand by what I post. As to the grammatical errors, I’ll take them too because for context, my words are my words.

I hate saying that I was wrong

I do not like to apologize or admit to being wrong, but when I am, I do it. I consider everything that I do and say, including social media posts, to be under scrutiny of accuracy and truthfulness. I don’t need anyone scraping my data to find something that I misstated, but surely could see something in court or online by someone who wants to dig something up. That’s fine. If I was incorrect in stating something, I’ll admit that I was wrong.  I will even apologize for it because I want to learn and improve, not be stuck in growth in the field.

pot calling the kettle black

Yes, you have seen me, and will continue to see, embed someone's tweets in a blog post. But you will never see me take someone's comments out of context, nor re-post someone's comment that will embarrass or shame. That is uncool. However, I will showcase some good ones that deserve more discussion than just a tweet can do. The really important tweets that affect hundreds or thousands of people. Lesley's tweet is one of those tweets. Her tweet was perfectly done and did not need rephrasing in the least bit (or byte).