Danielle Jablanski

And nobody in some of these like controlled research that we did on these different scenarios was prepared for that scenario.

the compromise of the integrity of the information they received to then take the next step in that functionality.

So maybe some sensor reading is saying, you know, in your HMI, hey, this is kind of the old SMAR example, the water incident in Florida that wasn't actually a hack of like, hey, this chemical is wildly off.

You actually need to enter in this new setting, right?

Your new set point should be X.

And you're actually being manipulated to do something that you've now created the exploit or the issue or the incident in your environment.

But it's because that integrity was completely called into question.

And if you can't tell me that that integrity is protected, so always never rule in nuclear, right?

Nuclear systems, weapons have to always be ready to function and never accidentally go off, right?

Always never.

Yeah.

That principle in all of these OT domains is so difficult to pinpoint and protect all the time.

I will say some of the Hollywood scenarios are pulled from research to like Mr. Robot.

I actually worked with the same research team that their prison episode is about.

And they actually show their research.

It's a father-daughter team.

And they're cited in my Atlantic Council work.

They actually show a printout of their paper that was presented at DEFCON, I want to say in 2012.

And it's a real world scenario.

But that manual operations, the standard operating procedures, there's a lot to borrow from nuclear there as well, because the intercontinental ballistic missiles, the ones that are in the silos in the western part of the United States, still have a two turnkey system.