Good morning everyone. Its great to see you on this Cold Saturday morning. Im going to be moderating a great hour i had a discussion on news threats in the modern age with three amazing authors who contributed to a dialogue weve been having since the beginning of mankind. Heres house today is going to start. Im going to introduce the three authors and let them speak a few minutes and the opportunity to tell what the book is about and then i will do a moderated discussion so we can pull out some major themes and open up to questions and answers. The books will be on sale at the end of this entity will be available for signature discussion. I want to start with my good friend who spent a career in counterterrorism and speaking of threats that this nation and this world faces. Shes now a lecturer at the university and fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health and one of time magazines innovative planners. She is the author most recently of the state of terror and that is a book she will be talking about today. Bruce is a security technologist at the cto system and the best times seller is data and goliath battles to collect your data and control your world and hes also a feller at the center of the law school which many of you probably know about the center and its working technology innovation. And then gabriella is the professor of human rights and humanitarian law where she focuses on international law, negotiation and the Armed Conflict and shes also the faculty director of the program on the national law. The new book the exact title i know because i read it, the future of violence robots, hackers and drones is a recent contribution to this notion of asymmetric threats. These new things that are coming but are not armies that are as briski sometimes as foreign armies. So if you could talk about your book and researching things we talk about a lot today. Sure. Thank you so much. I think i will just tell you what is new about this organization. First of all, it holds territory. Its very good at e. Brand brand. It raises money through oil sales and all your production is much more resilient than anybody dissipated. The also task the refugee flow so this is a perpetual resource for them. They create refugees and then they protect the flows. They are very good at attracting both locals taking advantage of the disenfranchisement of the sunni arabs into soap unprecedentedly good at attracting foreign fighters about 40,000 volunteers coming in not just fighters but also seeking doctors, engineers, people like ruth, they are capitalizing on a frustration with modernity very well. We see converts flowing and, people that are looking for a pure simple life. I will stop there. I think that is two minutes. Thank you very much. I want to turn to you about your new book and the threats that you examined. My book is called data and goliath. [laughter] people that pronounce it data dont get the book. Its about the data that is produced by the computers we interact with, but computers, atm machines and the like and it makes the book fundamentally about surveillance. Its how the data is generated and talking about the government surveillance both Good Governance and bad for bad use the data for the purposes which means the book is about control, its about persuasion on the advertising side and social control and i talk about why this is important and why in society we need to think about the privacy with respect to the data and im trying to talk about the fundamental issue of the Information Age which is how do we extract the data while using individual privacy. So this works because everybody used as a way of surveillance and control the traffic patterns because of that. So an enormous group of benefits come everyone is using it under surveillance. How do we balance this whether it is Law Enforcement or traffic or any other application and im trying to explore those issues in the book. So you walk into a shower and find a spider and it can be real or not were harmless, or it can be Surveillance Drones sent by your nextdoor neighbor that likes danny devito noisy dogs and is looking at pictures at the sports bar from the tv screens to the neighborhood. Or it could be a possibility that its a lethal spider drones sent by a military contractor whos now on vacation but uses a computer chip on that little trial and to order to shoot an infinite needle into your left by and then orders it back through a crack in the window and orders it to selfdestruct and neither are ever found. If you think that this is scifi, you and i can Purchase Online from private vendors a aa battery drone that comes with surveillance from canada and makes it legal until the next step. As of this is a if this is a page of the robotics generally are opening up as opportunities for harm. We all know about cyber. Biotechnology is two steps ahead of us but again now you and i produce genetic sequences and what used to be complicated designs of the most expert professors becoming routine for the graduate students among us. What is in the technologies is that they are becoming more accessible, cheaper, easy to handle command they distribute power. And they allow but just direct attacks but removed as well so they create what we call into world of too many friends where every individual group, corporation or states now poses a threat to any individual group, corporation or state anywhere around the world and the question for us in the book is how do we govern the world on the domestic level and on the international level. Is a wonderful summary and then hope for a dialogue among the authors. I do want to get into what can we do and what can people sitting here do. But i want to talk about the notion of asymmetrical threat. Your book david and goliath we have a notion if you think about the revolutionary war rebellion, freedom fighters, whatever you want to call them but theyve always faced asymmetrical threat and there are challenges in what ways is the modern age difference and in what ways is it similar to challenges that we faced in the past given that it seems Like Technology is going faster than anyone can respond to at any given time. It is a democratization of tactics and weaponry. When we walk outside and see a tank we would know a military was involved because they can afford tanks and that is a shorthand we have been using to figure out who is attacking us. In cyberspace with the urging technologies and also isis is a good example. Tactics are democratized from the nations and corporations and individuals. So todays top programs become the next state totals state tools and best of all flows downhill. Remember last november when sony was attacked there was a debate among experts whether the attack was perpetrated by north korea, governor of the 20 billion budget. That is extraordinary that we cant tell the difference and i think this speaks to isis as an organization that is a non nation state actor but its acting kind of nation state in ways we dont like because we have rules about nation states that have been sent to work. And theres catastrophic works. You think of as only the purview of the government democratizing everyone and i think we are trying to deal with how do we maintain security in this world of democratized threats. Whats also interesting is that we have even before 9 11 where we talk about the National Security threats and personals security threats for the business of the military in the establishment of what is the business of the police department. But part of the democratization does is that it lowers those lines. So we saw several near collision incident of people flying near airports and this is what passage with passage or airliners with someone when they need road in the u. S. Open to a stadium. Those were not even malicious intent operations but it does tell you what is possible out there so its not just the nationstate its what are the motivations and why do people do these things blurring the lines of how we think about regulating the National Security technology that we use. And some of this is good. We want this democratization of power and we want the state to have less power. The individuals have less power so theres a good advance. What i would say its icy very much related beauty. Moms are absolutely in many ways they are more important than the Law Enforcement. Ive been doing work in the refugee community. They are not trapped into isis and the moms cant find out what theyre doing because they are doing because they dont speak in glitch and they dont speak internet which is a big problem. So they need to go against. And i will end on that but one thing where that threat differs, what you all described as threats that they might be bad and a few things happen here and there. That land is what matters to the enemy and its where her work with isis really does differ in some sense to the traditional notion of the Foreign Affairs for the National Security for the new capabilities and new technology but thats only consistent with and complementary to the massive amount of land they govern in parts of the world. So, first of all described how those two pieces of isis work and then challenge me on that notion that im in the 20th century world. It is both a strength and vulnerability because it means that it is then possible to attack them in a way that wouldnt be possible if they didnt have a location. The reason land is so important in this group is to say a proto state, extraordinarily successful successful outcome of at, all activity in fact it was founded and who found religion. Its important to them because its what they call taxation and just protection. Yes. So, that is one of the things that make this group different. It is both its strength and vulnerability. I think that its important on either step and there is a sense of domination and control that gives you a special seat at the table in the International Community that for most types of threats that we talk about, you dont need territory. It doesnt matter where you are physically to attack somebody onsite or you can be anywhere around the world. It really doesnt matter. To start a bio weapon or release some harmful virus it doesnt matter where you are physically. And the drones as we know it allow you to Remote Attack where it doesnt really matter where you are physically so i think that if anything that in the emerging technologies diminish the importance of territory, and on the split site i think that is absolutely right territory is now also a vulnerability. But if it happens in its own territory and has no jurisdiction elsewhere if you have a cyber attack emanating from somewhere else come in just behind the force that doesnt have jurisdiction. They relied on these private companies that hes talking about. Who deals with the bp oil spill . Is that the government lacks bp is the only one that has the expertise and resources capacities to clean water. The government provides the support perimeter support but the government has become a much weaker in terms of its reliance. When a company has attacked the company does the cleanup. Sony was attacked by north korea and wasnt offended by the u. S. Government. I like this notion of land being both an asset and a liability. And it is. And depending on who you are coming you are going to choose to be landed were not. But if you are isis were trying to become a state and get into the un into this government Government Club so that land is an asset. If you were a criminal group and a hacker, land is a liability and now we know where you are. You see a lot of tactics but dont need that land. And this changes with history as where the power is centered its really only only 1400 intel now. Land around it was largely relevant you could be seen for years and the land it didnt matter and it wasnt those isolated pockets of where you were. Now i think that nationstates are stating more. And the notion of land as the power while still important to the United States as an example its getting more diffuse. Imagine a big Climate Change negotiations. Who do you think has more power, exxon or bolivia . Its not even close. A dont give cover in this particular and we are seeing more security related spheres that have that characteristic. A common theme and i dont know if you like it all three of you mentioned the challenge between security and privacy dealing with the populations and then being online and access to data. All three of you suggest we shouldnt view it that way. It isnt verses, it is come it is and come and it seems to me in reading that i cant help the audience how can you conceive of it. How can you monitor the muslim populations to make sure that violent extremism isnt going on and how can people think in the future given the kind of threats we are facing the privacy will be a factor in any of the stuff. In the liberty are generally its a balancing act if you give a little bit of something in exchange for the other and theres kind of a zerosum game in between the two can and we think it is more accurate to think about in the abuses when we take the term from biology where these values sometimes conflict but sometimes reinforce and they actually always depend on one another so security is largely meaningless but its also true that you cant have liberty without security so we tend to have these debates about surveillance for instance where we all do to disagree also disagree on the governments surveillance as an evil where its Privacy Security but reading about Airport Security because college surveillance because we dont like the word that of course its surveillance and the reason we submit ourselves and go through Airport Security procedures because we think it enhances both our security and liberty to file. We wouldnt be otherwise. But when we have government regulations that protect the medical records, we dont train liberty for privacy, we tend to think that this is kind of a regulation enhancing both. It enhances both the security and privacy. So in this complex world where there are so many actors out there is a big brother because so many little but theres so many little and mediumsized printers out there, it would be wrong to think about it as an always trade one for the other. A lot of the time youre trying to maximize both. I also use the term liberty. There is liberty versus control and security versus privacy comes from the belief i think false that surveillance enhances security. We surveyed the most important patients because it counters. It actually doesnt. What we know about it is that it is very invasive on the populations. They feel less secure, less safe, more hostile towards the surveillance. Theres there is actually a documentary on the community in chicago. Its a really beautiful commentary on what it does to the fabric of the community. It doesnt make them more secure. So it comes from this false belief that if you have less privacy coming you get more security. But we do not opine for the chinese local surveillance or for east germany. We dont wish that we lived in iraq. We like the fact that we have privacy and that gives us security. We are not secure when we are observed. And theres a really interesting ontology relationship. If you like surveillance predators. Now of course they are examples of old times when you have to give up something, some liberty. Airport Airport Security is a great example of that. Lots of others. We want the fbi to investigate crimes. So how do we make that tradeoff . We have some mechanisms and its really pretty simple. Transparency over accountability. Those mechanisms are in place we feel secure giving the abilities to invade the privacy because we know and we can verify that they are not going to do that capriciously or in selfserving ways. Think about how this might work in a country like china where you dont have those checks which is why on nsa surveillance which doesnt have transparency not counting so doesnt have oversight, doesnt have accountability. And this is surveillance that is making us less secure rather than more secure as opposed to something the police might be which would be much more transparent along on that answer. So i guess i would like to give a counter example. The president announced in february of this year that there were three pilot cities where there was the end counter in a Violent Extremism Program and one of them is boston. Another is los angeles and others were minneapolis. And there is a lot of concern about Civil Liberties when the government starts trying to work with individuals in a community that may be right for recruitment. By the way there are many converts as i said earlier. But i think how i would feel if i were worried about my child. Whats happening again, the moms want help. They know they cant do without the government and the government cant do it without the moms. So, theres an example where on the one hand, there is a Civil Liberties concerns of the people who are most affected often are not as concerned as those that are thinking about intellectually. Jessica brings up a good point in her book but i want you to bring up. The challenge for government especially in terms of isis there is a legitimate intelligence interest allowing extremists to use social media to appoint that there is a dance in some ways going on you dont have to think about any sort of traditional Law Enforcement aspect. Can you describe a little bit . Is that government able to sort of monitor but then be able to tell okay we are past the point of this being advance and now this person is radicalized and about to jump on a plane . The group is unprecedentedly good at using social media and theyve been using especially twitter, youtube and facebook took done isis recruitment sites more quickly than the twitter but they move onto encrypted sites sometimes spanning up to 100 hours trying to recruit one individual. How do you the tradeoff is if you take it all down like the United Kingdom is trying to do how do you continue to be aware of whats going on when you take down the litter twitter when another one pops up and with my colleague mike walter found is that what happens is the new twitter account there are a lot fewer people like us, so obviously there are a lot of academics who are following these accounts. How do you find that tradeoff . You are right that presumes and child pornographer as well and i think im like the United Kingdom, we havent banned or insisted that every single one of those accounts get taken down immediately. And again this is the democratization of tactics. We are seeing twitter used her as an organizational tool and so can collectors and dissidents. So these tools of coordination and communication and organization are incredibly empowering for everybody both the good guys and the bad guys. The only thing keeping the society of lotus there are more good guys and bad guys so most of the organization is done on the site into systems wherever they are in the modern technology and it gets interesting to watch this. They use the spec to organize. The government uses facebook to arrest so we are seeing this complicated power play between traditional power which i think of as governments and corporations into this more distributive power which might be isis or a criminal organization and this balance is changing and we are seeing this democratization which really gets into the notion of many against many and thats why i set you up with that. Related to the previous conversation about the privacy and liberty and security theres this notion that the internet is a virtual place. Thats why nobody should be in the business of watching what we do. The way of the medical records and all that and we couldnt be placed in the physical world and in this socalled virtual world. So what claims to be having those corporations but also the potential harm that we have and any claim against them and hear we share the same sensibilities that dont think about product liability. We we have to demand companies all the time to make sure that what they give us were produced for us its safe regardless of whether its security related or not to think about drug and food administration. The government cant make sure the food that you use or consume is safe and what they can do is order the companies to make sure that its safe, and i think a lot of that would be featured in the conversation off just what we want in relationship to the big brother from these corporations how much selfregulation and how much selfmonitoring do they take down or allow them. And it doesnt just leave it to the Market Forces but it says here is the line that you cant cross anymore. Last week john brennan the director of the cia, his email account was hacked by a teenager. Why does he use aol . [laughter] thats the question. What is important is that he did nothing wrong. He didnt have a lousy password come he didnt write it down or share or email it. What they did is called the rise verizon pretending to be an employee and got information, credit card, a bunch of information and used that and called Aol Customer Service pretending to be john brennan and got. And brennan cant do anything about it. We just arent going to let you this is a matter of public safety. The government that comes off in the books as fumbling and big. And the narrative of being on a mission all knowing and all powerful. My overall emphasis is what can the government do. There is a limit to what the government can do both about whats happening both in iraq and syria. Theres a sense of there is a sense of moral imperative and at the same time i am not sure how much we can do without making things worse. They decided to take on this problem of recruitment who are actually responding to kids in fact yesterday i spent quite a bit of time. I dont usually do this because someone in libya telling me that he was about to join isis. I think the state department is trying to respond to the online recruitment with something called the think again turn away exactly. It needs to be 19yearolds that are doing that so im going to be participating. They would compete to develop the best Online Platform to respond to this its important to get involved. It was a challenge for the National Security apparatus for the Domestic Violence in the revolution and the traditional notion like from arkansas who speaks three languages getting recruited by the cia. And a Government Employee might have been arrested and had to change the notion. But governments are slow and ponderous but very powerful. We are going to see this. Albeit the battle between this quick and a strong and go through a procurement process and give someone a clearance. Its probably best if you dont get one. So this group will move faster and this group will be stronger and its kind of a david and goliath and it is an open question whos going to win traditionally. They are picking up and realizing they have to act differently. When it technologies emerge which side are they going to benefit from and getting back to the dissidents using facebook to be organized. Who is going to win the next platform. Which is that going to favor and in all of these technologies, current and future are going to affect. The quick dissidents or put anything. I think there are several principles here. The first is that we should try to respond to every threat. Here i want to echo what julia has written about at great length in the cost resilience that if we want to be a free society and we want to be true to the values and without a certain degree of threat. That is true in our letter a day life everyday life and it just she makes the same points that we dont try to fix everything or respond to everything. The second principle is that the government cant do this alone. The great nsa without the private sector the government must rely on them for partnerships to perform security functions into and the third is that we as citizens have the responsibility to engage in the conversation in the preferences so let me give you two examples of the different social attitudes they have towards regulating the governments role if you want regulating technologies of empowerment. We made a choice in the constitution to have a right to bear arms and therefore any regulation can only be minimal and very restricted. Passenger cars are high speeds and the public roadways and operated by millions of people who are more or less experienced in doing so. It sounds crazy. The reason or the way that we can enjoy driving at some risk but not an intolerable risk we think its because we have a very Intricate System of licensing and identification and insurance and testing of the vehicle and the driver and we dont really have a social conversation about whether we have an inalienable right to drive without government interference and the conversations to these emerging technologies that are sort of hit and novel but we as citizens now have a responsibility to think what is the sensible way of control or addressing these issues going to the benefits of Technology Without putting us in an intolerable risk. Talking about making the discussion more democratic we do want to open it up to any questions. Theres a microphone that could come up and good, and my only demand is that it is a question. Any questions for the panel. That there can be more than one. You have a few minutes. What would be the scenario if we didnt have isis . Spinnaker hed taken all care if we did nothing, let it be and what would happen. I dont have a crystal wall that we do ball but we do know that terrorist groups come and go and it is fashionable today and will always be fashionable and at the same time, i think there are the iraqi people that are asking quite a bit of this and they are asking for the military assistance to and there is a humanitarian crisis that i think we must respond to because we did play a big role in the rise of this organization formed in response to the invasion of iraq and then when we left in the way that we did in the hands of the sectarian leader, that led to increased sectarian tensions that have taken advantage of. I do feel confident saying that. The question is what will the humanitarian impact between now and when it ultimately disappears. People dont do this and my question to you is what you see now that makes it easier to do the things that we need to do. The story shows that there is nothing and i think that whatever we in the industry make demands on users or blame users is a failure of the system that we have failed. We need to have security mechanisms that work for the average users that have to be able to use security. And i know my father isnt going to take a class and so things have to work. What ive seen is things that work that are not seen. So right now after decades of trying to get people to use email encryption, most of the emails now are encrypted because not because youre doing anything but because now we have a dozen email providers and yahoo and google encrypted mail between them and so there are all of these arrangements so behind the scenes you dont even see it, your email is encrypted which means criminals cant get at it and thats fantastic when you pick up your cell phone contact radio call is encrypted to the tower. You dont know thats happening but it means someone with a radio wasnt listening to your phone call and thats awesome. What i see is made in privacy and security and encryption are the things that happened behind the scenes because it has to deal with the user that has no skill and partly it is Market Forces to solve this so its not that there is more than one email providers have been providers have been able providers of them they will compete over to the privacy tools and thats good to take care of it. So if you have to click accept when is the last time you read through the 500 pages . Neither did i. And its three of transferring responsibility from them to you but thats wrong. The recognition for the government and private sector and the rest of us. Its helpful for people who feel overwhelmed by this notion of the cyber threat or data. What are the best strategies . Its the single most effective thing you can do to keep safe. Never trust the market. [laughter] if you buy the book and give it to your friends you wouldnt get otherwise. A special discount for people with aol. [laughter] we are all using the mobile devices that require access so my question is when you talk to people, those of us that are not writers, when you talk they look at you like you are a crazy conspiracy theorist and im just curious what do you talk to your friends about how do you communicate with us like here she goes again. A lot of what we can do is around the edges. Five years ago it was on the computer and i wouldve ive taught you how to secure the computer to react now it is on google and facebook. Its in the cloud controlled by other companies. Your level of control is much less. Remember last year they did nothing wrong. They posted their photos deleting that they have some had some security and privacy. And they found that apple messed up. They could read the 87 page license agreement paula going to say is youve got to trust us and if we are lying to you, sorry it was just business. And so there are things we can do. And in my book i talk with them but is it largely around the edges because it is so much out of our control this is why i really believe that we need Government Solutions and regulations. We get a lot of benefits from that versus others to suggest that a disrespect to the point of resilience, you have to accept and expect some degree of infringement, so i we have differences and i just assumed that the nsa reads all my emails and i hope you entertain them. It is much more of the colleagues reading the emails. I should say we are at a festival and all three of you managed to write mainstream books about either very scary or very technical things to audiences that are not necessarily in the field of 24 max the having the un particular actually sort of engaged the enemy. Can you spend a minute i think people would be curious how do you actually do that . I used to hang out but i cant do that anymore. Its more than anyone else because they dont agree. But now its quite easy to engage with jihadis or other kinds of terrorists online. Dont answer this without a lawyer. [laughter] i am really curious just like you are. Somebody had read my book and felt he started quoting the book saying why he would like to join isis and that is how he first came to me. He was quoting my book saying that he wanted to join. That wasnt the intent of your book. I told him please write me an essay of why you are going to join and why you are not going to join. But then he keeps engaging with me. The one about al qaeda to america has gotten out of prison, and he really wants to get involved in communicating. He wants to be part of the solution. And that is easy to do. But the answer is i never pretend to be someone im not. I thought that i wouldnt be very good at it in person and we cant do that because of human subjects requirements. We cant do that. Talk about the universities a scientific experiment obviously others we have time for two more questions if we can be quick with the questions and all of you mentioned that its more of a necessity but given the state of the United States congress and you dont see that happening. It looks like there will be some legislation given what happened yesterday so despite everything that you hear on tv, take a look at where is a Common Ground where various pieces of both baby falling on the sidelines. Recently they said they were going to regulate local drug use. Thats an example of something that can be done without congress. So part of it is the states now a lot of effort at the state level to see what they can do in the state without federal involvement and also just like the other context if and when we see a terrible thing happening, then there will be a government response and this is the unfortunate way things work the most recent emergency we are very good at ratcheting up. Its again the unfortunate and part of the sort of work on the response of terrorism that has to do with responding to whatever is out there and dealing with Identity Theft and things like that when a catastrophic event happens the response would be different. You spoke about licensing for cars. How do you feel that it would be enhanced with the opposite of that if we had to license Internet Users . It has all sorts of problems that are beyond the scope of what we have left. I would put the onus on providers. Why does an isp pass through all traffic and require my father to have a personal firearm i dont see the uses as a place to regulate in the same way you might do cars. Im interested in the Car Manufacturers or car dealers or the gas companies. That is a bigger place than we have people regulating so i would have more regulation on that. There have been people writing about it and you can argue it either way. So i mentioned earlier the incident where they drove into the open stadium. There was no way to trace back. If they are going to use things in this way i want to be able to trace it back to an operator into the same is true with the company that sells the team sequencing online and at the lab it couldnt i want some kind of obligation to monitor the purchases through the website. There are survey cards in your templates if you can build enough because each year it gets bigger thats true and better. Just before the round of applause for the great panel i do want to say given the world we live in it easy to tune out. And the new measures in a scary world is at its peak in the ways that are very accessible so please buy them and support their efforts. The book the state of terror the future of violence. And then the data i said it right the first time. Data and goliath and they are all going to be back in the room in just a few minutes. So thank you all for coming out. [applause] now want to introduce you we want to introduce you to the university of wisconsin Professor John diamond. What do you do here at the University ClickUniversity Click im a professor in educational leadership