Robert Garigue (RIP) remains one of the giants of 21st Century cyber-security. He was 20 years ahead of his time, and most have still not caught up with him. Below is his cloud list, but we have also selected a few items to showcase. Trust on the edges, not centralized butts in seats, is the heart of security.
Here is the single coolest slide that he and Robert Steele created together. We strongly recommend every single thing he has ever published, when he died in his sleep at the age of 50, we did what we could to gather up his work and showcase it here in memory and in perpetuity.
Gunnar Peterson on Robert Garigue’s Last Briefing [Note: this is the one briefing that best captures the idiocy across the US cyber-system — still pretending to build Maginot Lines and still absolutely utterly with a clue at the code level.]
Robert Garigue, CISO Briefing
All cars can be cyber-hacked, either leveraging internal computers or by attaching a disposable kit.
As a general rule, all modern cars that come with an integrated computer are easily hacked. For older cars one can attack one’s own small transponder and kit to do certain things at certain times, such as explode the gas tank or burn through the brake lines, destroying evidence of the attack method in the process.
Here is the original post of the document and our critique.
Since then the position of the ADDNI/OS has been abolished, the long-standing director of the OSC that did so much damage in his ignorance and arrogance has retired, to be replaced by a second stringer from the NRO, and of course we now know that there is no management, no integration, and no oversight of intelligence collection and covert action — nor is there any management, integration, and oversight of everything else: processing, analysis, outreach, sharing, or the creation of ethical evidence-based decision-support, which is simply not what the US secret world does. It collects — everything — as espensively as possible. It kills with drones — with a 98% error rate — and also very expensively. It does nothing useful to Whole of Government to to creating a prosperous world at peace, a world in which the USA can enjoy the fruits of peace, commerce, and friendship.
Below are a few graphics and high-level pieces on what the US intelligence should look like. They are logical extensions of the earlier pieces published in the early 1990’s.
HUMINT is the heart of the matter. What CIA, DIA, SOCOM, and DHS are doing in the HUMINT arena is more of the wrong thing. Now that NSA is being revealed as the naked (and rather dumb) emperor of intelligence, IMINT is largely dead (and what the drones should be doing instead of killing 98% wrong targets), MASINT is still not worth the money we spend on it, and OSINT has been corrupted beyond belief, the time is right to revisit the entirety of intelligence (decision-support). Here is my HUMINT scorecard only, 2012 USA Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Scorecard 1.1 and three starting points:
Intelligence for the President–AND Everyone Else, as published in CounterPunch, Weekend Edition, February 27 – 1 March 2009
Fixing the White House and National Intelligence, International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, Spring 2010
Human Intelligence (HUMINT): All Humans, All Minds, All the Time(US Army Strategic Studies Institute, June 2010
At the highest level, new and not captured by the search term, we recommend:
humint is such a common search you are almost always better off starting with the Search Directory in the middle column,
That will yield right away:
Nobody does this. It is precisely what the Director of OMB should be demanding, and it is precisely what the Open Source Agency (OSA) would do if the corrupt powers that be were not so set against anything that provides the truth on every threat, every policy, every demographic, in a coherent holistic manner with true cost economics embedded and ethical evidence-based decision-support as the outcome.
Beyond Whole of Government lies the Smart Nation concept that harnesses the distributed intelligence of all eight tribes (academic, civil society including labor and religion, commerce, government at all levels, law enforcement, media, military, and non-government/non-profit), and beyond that — and probably coming first — lies Open Source Everything (OSE) as the technical solution, and Multinational, Multiagency, Multidisciplinary, Multidomain Information-Sharing and Sense-Making (M4IS2) as the human solution.
Here are a few of the seminal references on Whole of Government Intelligence:
N2-04, “NATO Open Source Intelligence Course” (NS) (This is a two week course from Aug 2013)
Aim: To educate NATO and national intelligence analysts about Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) operations, techniques, requirements and procedures
N2-04 NATO Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) Course
OSC (CIA Open Source Center) does not do Open Source Intelligence (OSINT). It does OSIF (Open Source Information) and then compounds that inadequacy by classifying what it does produce. Its outreach, as with outreach across the US national security archipelago, is trivial to the point of being unprofessional. To better understand the persistent inadequacies of the OSC (that also destroyed the perfectly good, even stellar, Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS) valued by academics world-wide), see: 2004 Modern History of Public Intelligence and the Opposition.
To understand how the OSC (and NATO) have completely neglected OSINT in favor of OSIF, see this commentary from the father of OSINT for NATO:
A partial excuse for OSC’s incapacity is the internal fractionalism within CIA — the Directorate of Operations (DO), traditionally focused on clandestine human intelligence (HUMINT) and overt debriefings of legal travelers in the USA, refused to let OSC do overt human exploitation that is easily 80% if not more of the total open source information terrain. Beyond that OSC suffers the same culture, history, and language short-falls as any US organization that insists its employees all have secret clearances, and lacking indigenous human access, cannot overcome their myopic perspective.
There are only three people associated with CIA that we consider respectably informed about OSINT as it could be but it not: Joe Markowitz, Carol Dumaine, and Kevin Sheid.
Everything published in the past 20 years on OSINT in CIA’s house journal, Studies in Intelligence is mediocre. For two books that grasp the larger picture and that we strongly recommend, see:
For informed views from over 250 international experts who actually know something about OSINT, see:
Here are some of the OSINT overviews we consider useful:
Here is the briefing:
All briefings can be found at
“Intelligence tradecraft” applies to each element of the intelligence cycle and is distinct for each of the eight tribes of intelligence. It also varies depending on the threat target and the policy objective.
Each of the above can be further distinguished at the four different levels of effort (strategic, operatonal, tactical, technical — the threat changes depending on the level of analysis, neither CIA nor DIA have figured that out yet — nor do they care). Each of the above also changes dramatically depending on the specific coiuntry and region — US “assumptions,” for example with respect to politics, culture, economics, and technology — are retarded when it comes to deep analysis of African and Asian countries. The US also does not factor in the reality of how others perceive the US, or the reality that three quarters of the economy is not traditional financial, but rather System D, barter, or via other metrics including kinship. In collection the US secret world collects everything that can be collected digitally (like the drunk looking for his keys under the light instead of where he lost them), processes almost nothing, and confuses powerpoint slides and slick glossies with thinking.
Had to Stop. WordPress Cannot Handle So Many Links, and Entire Phi Beta Iota Site is About Peace and Prosperity Through Intelligence with Integrity. Links Below Line Estimated 25% of Relevant Links Across all 12,000+ Posts.
Excellent search and badly needed PhD thesis that could “write the book” on the role of intelligence in support of peace operations. The top three living experts are:
MajGen Patrick Cammaert, RN NL (Ret)
Col Jan-Inge Svensson, Land Forces Sweden (Ret)
Dr. Walter Dorn, CA
Others including Robert Steele have a great deal to contribute to aspects of the research. A proper study has never been done, and a book that is oriented toward and useful not just to the UN, which is a mess, but also to NATO, the EU, China into Africa, etcetera, would be most valuable.
The hardest part of dealing with peacekeeping is similar to the challenge that the US Special Operations Command and its renewed emphasis on White SOF faces: it is not possible to create a prosperous world at peace through preventive measures at the tactical levels, if the strategic level is totally corrupt and WANTS war. The Western system we have in place right now is a “war-based” system of, by, and for the banks and the 1%. Even the economic “treaties” and agreements are war-based in their motivation (persistent under-market access to resources) and war-typed (secret, corrupt, predatory).
Waging peace cannot be achieved by reforming the present structures. A transformation is required. This makes it an ethical, financial, and intellectual challenge of the first order.
Hence, a proper PhD would address the four levels of analysis:
Noi purtroppo non abbiamo la presentazione fatta dalla signora Dumaine, che era (e rimane) un dipendente della CIA. Qui di seguito sono le presentazioni, con le parole in formato Notes, che sono stati presentati a responsabili di filiali di intelligence militare a Roma, con il direttore generale della scuola di intelligence militare come nostro ospite.
Gracias. Aqui mis dos precentaciones majores, uno para Chile y el otro para Espana, ambos entregado en el idioma, y tambian mis graficas en espanol. Todo lo que se encuentra aqui en ingles se puede traducir utilizando Google Translate, la primara funccion al alto mano de la segunda columna. Tambien mi presentacion,, pero escrito en espanol para la revista AAIntelligencia.
Camino corto: http://tinyurl.com/Steele-en-Espanol
2011: Competitive Commercial Intelligence and Strategy in International Markets – Context and Challenge Inteligencia Empresarial y Estrategia Competitiva en Mercados Internacional – Contexto y DesafioAA Graficas en Espanol (63)
Cari amici, otto di voi (o una persona otto volte) immesso nella deinizione. Ci è voluto poco tempo a notare che avrebbe dovuto essere DEFINIZIONE.
Con le scuse per il nostro Google italiano ….
Qui è più lastest definizione di Robert Steele di OSINT:
01 OSINT include tutto ciò che è apertamente, legalmente, eticamente e disponibile, in tutte le discipline (umane, le immagini, i segnali, le misurazioni e le firme), ma è importante capire che l’informazione grezza è Open Source Informazione (OSIF). Non è OSINT fino a quando non è stato elaborato, analizzato, visualizzati e condivisi a sostegno di una decisione specifica. “Broadcast OSINT” è una contraddizione in termini.
02 OSINT è una funzione prevalentemente HUMINT perché l’80% o più di ciò che può essere raccolto legalmente ed eticamente – apertamente – non è digitale, non in inglese, e più spesso che no, non è stato pubblicato a tutti – questo include storico , la conoscenza culturale e locale – per esempio tribale e legami familiari e le ostilità che non sono mai stati documentati, ma sono a disposizione per chiedere. OSINT non ripetere non è una disciplina “tecnico”, come gli americani hanno così foolishing trattata – come non lo sono “documenti” o “social media” separate “INT” Questa è follia infantile, una scusa per creare supervisori più inutili alla fine della loro carriera.
03 OSINT dovrebbe essere – ma non è – sia la “fonte di prima istanza” per tutte le comunità professionali di intelligence (attività illecite più non autorizzati o fonti segrete e metodi che violano i diritti di chiunque altro) E OSINT dovrebbe essere il default
04 Sia le Nazioni Unite e la NATO hanno sperimentato con OSINT, ed entrambi hanno commesso degli errori – le Nazioni Unite hanno permesso il Dipartimento di sicurezza e protezione a prendere l’iniziativa di analisi, e sono, ci dispiace dirlo per esperienza diretta, corrotto fino al midollo – non tutti, ma un numero preoccupante – dei loro agenti di sicurezza hanno educazioni delle scuole superiori ed etica limitate – in un caso particolare, il responsabile della sicurezza è stato fabbricato il pericolo al fine di aumentare la sua quota di bilancio (questo è stato in Guatemala, la Commissione contro l’impunità). Nel caso della NATO, non è andata oltre OSIF. Affido alla vostra attenzione il seguente link che fornisce la recentissima valutazione generale di brigata James Cox, il Vice N-2 per la NATO che ha ottenuto OSINT andare loro (e per il Partenariato per la Pace) e chi crede ora dobbiamo creare agenzie di Open Source a livello nazionale e multinazionale, come noi e altri (andando indietro di decenni) sono stati raccomandare.
Abbiamo recentemente messo insieme un elenco speciale orientata verso la NATO (e ora l’Unione europea, che ha appena creato un Centro di risposta alle emergenze che riteniamo dovrebbe essere una società mista con l’Unione europea concentrandosi sulla messa a fuoco non militari e la NATO sulle militare, con piena trasparenza per altri potenziali partecipanti.
“Con la purtroppo crescente frequenza e la complessità dei disastri, gli Stati membri dell’UE devono collaborare ancora più strettamente. Il nuovo Centro di risposta alle emergenze UE fornisce uno stato della piattaforma di arte che permette loro di coordinare le circostanze più estreme, permette loro di affrontare queste sfide ancora più efficace e quindi aiuta a proteggere i nostri cittadini “, ha dichiarato José Manuel Barroso, Presidente della Commissione europea.
Vedi anche la nostra categoria
English below the line
The National Intelligence Model (NIM) has been used by police to do intelligence with integrity about threats, capabilities, and outcomes. This is not done by the US Government or most others. Capabilities are generally not related to threats (inputs) or outcomes (desired strategy and policy goals) because corruption clogs up the system–decisions are made on the basis of political and financial influence, and the elements of government — the FBI, for example — are not held accoiuntable for actually producing any outcomes of significance, such as the elimination of organized crime (political, financial, and street-level).
Here at Phi Beta Iota there are four strategic analytic models, one graphic on evaluating intelligence (not something anyone does now with any degree of intelligence or integrity), and one graphic on Whole of Government applied intelligence with constant integrity. Links are below. First however, Ada Bozeman’s words, words we have embraced as our guiding light in creating a Smart Nation and an approach to hybrid governance in the public interest that is rooted in ethical evidence-based decision-support.
Ada Bozeman has written:
(There is a need) to recognize that just as the essence of knowledge is not as split up into academic disciplines as it is in our academic universe, so can intelligence not be set apart from statecraft and society, or subdivided into elements…such as analysis and estimates, counterintelligence, clandestine collection, covert action, and so forth. Rather … intelligence is a scheme of things entire. (Bozeman 1998: 177):