Author: Lisa

Predicting the Future

That didn’t take long — https://www.engadget.com/three-samsung-employees-reportedly-leaked-sensitive-data-to-chatgpt-190221114.html

Leaking data is obviously a big problem if the user base is “anyone with an internet connection”, but potentially not great even for an internal implementation of an AI chatbot.

Content management platforms, in the early days, had a big problem with search because the indexing engine had super-user rights – so searching for “acquisition” would give you links that you couldn’t read. Even if the titles didn’t tell you anything (does “Project OPUS” or “Project Golden Falcon” have any meaning to you?), the dates & authors told you something (hey, there’s a bunch of new docs the C-levels are creating about acquisitions this past few weeks … sure that doesn’t mean anything!). Eventually any halfway decent content management platform understood permissions and at least attempts to filter results based on what you have permission to view.

AI is different, unfortunately in a way that makes implementing that type of security more difficult. Other than individualizing the trained AIs for each user (so info you feed in is only going to be reflected in your future results) or not training based on user input (only use stuff that’s openly readable already) … it would be rather challenging to filter an implementation so it knows stuff it’s been told but doesn’t convey that information to unauthorized individuals.

Increasing Kibana CSV Report Max Size

The default size limit for CSV reports in Kibana is 10 meg. Since that’s not enough for some of our users, I’ve been testing increases to the xpack.reporting.csv.maxSizeBytes value.

We’re still limited by the ES http.max_content_length value — which the documentation seems pretty confident shouldn’t be increased because the system can become unstable. Increasing the max Kibana report size to 100mb just yields a different error because ES doesn’t like it. 75 exhausted the JavaScript heap (?) – which I could get around by setting  NODE_OPTIONS=–max_old_space_size=4096 … but that just led to the server abending whenever a report was run (in fact, I had to remove the reports I tried to run from the server to get everything back into a working state). Increasing the limit to 50 meg, though, didn’t do anything unreasonable in dev. So somewhere between 50 and 75 meg is our upper limit, and 50 seemed like a nice round number to me.

Notes on resource usage – Data is held in memory as a report is created. We’d see an increase in memory/CPU usage while the report is being generated (or, I guess more accurately, a longer time during which the memory/CPU usage is increased because if a 10 meg report takes 30 seconds to run then a 50 meg report is going to take 2.5 minutes to run … and the memory/CPU usage is pretty much the same during the “a report is running” period).

Then, though, the report is stashed in ElasticSearch for user(s) to retrieve within .reporting* indicies. And that’s where things get a little silly — architecturally, this is just another index; it ages off with a lifecycle policy if one exists. But it looks like they never created a lifecycle management policy. So you can still retrieve reports run a little over two years ago! We will certainly want to set up a policy to clean up old reports … just have to decide how long is reasonable.

 

Using Excel to turn week of month and day of week into actual dates

Our patching schedules are algorithmic – the 1st Tuesday of the month, the 3rd Wednesday of the month, etc. But that’s not particularly useful for notifying end users or for us to verify functionality after patching.

Graphical user interface, table Description automatically generated

Long term, I think we can pull the source data from a database and create appointment items each month for whatever list of servers will be patched that month based on a relative date (so no one has to add new servers or remove decommissioned servers). But, short term? I really wanted a way to see what date a server would be patched. So I created a but of a convoluted spreadsheet to produce this information based on a list of servers and patching schedule patterns.

There are two “extra” tabs used – “Dates” used to say what month and year I want the patching dates for

Graphical user interface, application, table, Excel Description automatically generated

And “ServerData” which provides a cross-reference between the server names and a useful description.

Graphical user interface, application, table, Excel Description automatically generated

There are then a series of formulae used to add columns to our source data. First, the “Function” is populated in column G with a VLOOKUP =VLOOKUP(B2,ServerData!A:B,2,FALSE)

Columns I and J break the “1st Saturday” into the two components – week of month and day of week –

I =LEFT(C2,3)
J =RIGHT(C2,LEN(C2)-4)

Columns K and L then map these components into numeric values I can use in a formula:

K =IF(I2=”1st”,1,IF(I2=”2nd”,2,IF(I2=”3rd”,3,IF(I2=”4th”,4,”Unscheduled”))))
L =IF(J2=”Sunday”,1,IF(J2=”Monday”,2,IF(J2=”Tuesday”,3,IF(J2=”Wednesday”,4,IF(J2=”Thursday”,5,IF(J2=”Friday”,6,IF(J2=”Saturday”,7,”Unscheduled”)))))))

And finally a formula in column H that turns the week of month and day of week values into an actual date within the month and year on the “Dates” tab:

H =DATE(Dates!$B$2,Dates!$A$2,1+7*K2)-WEEKDAY(DATE(Dates!$B$2,Dates!$A$2,8-L2))

Voila – I have a spreadsheet that says we should expect to see this specific list of servers being patched tonight.

Graphical user interface, application, table, Excel Description automatically generated

 

Banning ARs?

The local paper had a reader poll asking if “the AR-15” should be banned — with a decent number (especially in our heavily Republican area) saying yes.

There are a number of things I don’t get about this proposal. Firstly, I am willing to assume they mean any AR-style weapon because banning Colt’s AR-15 but allowing all of the derivatives seems particularly pointless. But … what is the point of banning that one style semi-automatic rifle? From the police pictures, it looks like Tennessee shooter had a KelTec SUB2000 Carbine Rifle, a LSA Grunt .300 Blackout Rifle, and a Smith & Wesson M&P9 Shield EZ. Only one of those would be banned if AR-style weapons were banned, but any could kill a lot of people quickly. Even if the ban encompassed all high-capacity weapons, the Shield — with its 8 round magazine instead of the higher capacity magazines normally found in the two rifles … you can buy ten mags. Fill ’em up, and quickly eject the empty one & reload a full magazine. If we ban X, then Y will become the weapon of choice. OK, ban Y! Now it’s Z. Or A. Or L.

And that doesn’t take into account what’s already out there today. In 2020, the firearm industry trade association said there were 19.8 million “modern sporting rifles” in circulation since 1990. Stopping the sale of new guns of a particular style seems like theater — an ineffective non-answer to the question. Even a far more effective idea like limiting all production weapons to five seconds per round still encounters the “what is out there is out there” problem. The idea of banning a style of weapon makes me think of the ineffective “fix” to the student debt problem — university is incredibly expensive. Forgiving the debt of a time-slice of students doesn’t fix the fundamental problem.

It is not a “witch hunt” if there are really witches

Our local paper had a political cartoon today with a dude exclaiming to his wife:

“Just think — if Donald Trump can be indited for misappropriating funds to pay hush money to a porn star he slept with while his wife was home with their newborn baby … WHAT’S TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING TO *ME*?”

And the cartoon answer? “Me, dear. Me, and the second amendment.”

But that skips the reality of the potential charge — what’s to stop that from happening to you? Are you running for office and getting undocumented campaign contributions to pay someone off? Are you misappropriating business funds (and falsifying records to cover up the misappropriated funds)? If not … then you CANNOT misappropriate funds (and lie about it) full stop. For the small percentage of Americans for whom the answer is “why, yes I am running for office”? Then the answer is YOU. Make your bribe and extortion payments from YOUR money. Dude isn’t being investigated for making a hush money payment. He’s being investigated for falsifying business records so he could use that for a hush money payment. He is being investigated for receiving illegal campaign contributions.

On a similar thought, I am certain Republican governors (attorney generals, district attorneys) are going to start threatening to prosecute former Democratic presidents. And, if they have jurisdiction and a real crime? Good for them! If Arkansas wants to finally investigate things like Clinton using the state cops to cover up his affairs? It’s about time! Because, unlike the quippy comments about unjustified political persecutions want you to think … Trump lived in New York for a very long time. If he committed crimes there, it’s reasonable for law enforcement in that area to investigate it. Just like it’s reasonable for the state of Arkansas to investigate things Clinton did while he lived there. It is, however, not reasonable for, say, the state of Texas to try arresting Biden for federal laws that they don’t like or things he did in Delaware. That would be political persecution.

The hush money thing reminds me of an experience I had early in my career — the company had a lot of rules around spending money, and there were employees who decided to exploit those rules. There were some things you could “expense” — basically use the corporate AmEx to cover & never have to account for. A local manager had an agreement with a supplier to submit invoices for items that qualified for expense purchasing — “LAN Cables”, “CD-R Media” — in spite of the fact he was actually picking something else up. I was sent to pick up the handheld radios he ordered, and I couldn’t because the invoice they wanted me to sign was for cat6 cables. I wasn’t trying to make a moral stand (at the time, I didn’t realize there was a moral stand to take) … I just didn’t see how I could submit an expense report with a receipt that didn’t match up with what we were purchasing. The manager explained it to me … and, yeah, I refused to partake in that scheme. I’m sure he sent someone else to subvert company purchasing policies for him. But he wasn’t the manager for long after the lies were discussed with his manager — a new site manager was brought in & they discovered that the office had purchased tens of thousands of dollars of “fun stuff” — pool table, big screen TV, sofas, alcohol — and outfitted a hidden room in the warehouse. Employees were taking computers, TVs, etc home too. None of those people were fired for buying a TV or computer — they were fired for stealing from their employer and falsifying purchase records. And it might have been possible for an over-zealous prosecutor to attempt to charge the company (or the company execs) with falsifying business records. There were falsified business records. But the company, and it’s executive team, didn’t know the records were false. The individuals who did the lying were punished, and the victims of the lies were left to clean up the mess. And that’s what seems to be happening to Trump — except he appears to be one of the “in the know” people and not an innocent employer who hired scammers and cheats.