Nine books later most still do not get it -- secret intelligence is largely waste -- unprocessed technical collection that feeds Congressional pork, nothing more.
INTL304 – Intelligence CollectionStrategic and Tactical Intelligen.docxdoylymaura
INTL304 – Intelligence Collection
Strategic and Tactical Intelligence Collection Requirements:
In this first week you will be looking at the differences between strategic and tactical intelligence collection, which address quite different problems and have different pressures and demands. To complete this discussion board you should review IIE Part 3 (3.doc), Strategic Intelligence, review the IPB, and CIA collection operations. Also review chapter 12 in the Clark book.
Once you are prepared please address the following question: Your initial post should be a substantive 250+ words, student responses 250+ words
Identify at least 5 significant differences (there are many more) between intelligence collection for strategic analysis and intelligence collection for tactical military requirements. Remember to take a strategic view of this question. Think about source of requirements, tasking of platforms, turnaround times, the effect on analysis, collection planning, etc.
Use examples, demonstrate you have read the materials, and apply critical thinking skills to earn maximum points on this board. Show your sources as well...it assists in the rigor of your thinking. You are welcome to draw on additional readings, but your work must at least reflect that you've completed the required readings.
Student Response #1 – Michael
One of the many significant differences between strategic and tactical intelligence is what it is used for and who the major consumers are for each type. Strategic intelligence is used to create strategy, plans and policy at the nation and theater level and created by national security issues.1 Where tactical intelligence is used for planning and conducting tactical operations and used by field commanders.2 This creates a completely different consumer set for each type of information produced.
Another difference is how Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) is conducted. For strategic levels the theater is evaluated and the doctrinal principles are applied in a long range large scale model. This means that every aspect of the theater is looked at from geography to the local belief systems and the overall operational plan (example: Enduring Freedom) is created and sent to the tactical units. IPB for the tactical units is what I and my team did in Afghanistan. As the ISR collection manager I used every asset I had available to collect on the terrain and saturate the target area with ISR. Mean while my team dug though the databases and HUMINT information available and created target packages. Each time we did a major air assault we had nine to ten weeks of collection going on before the troops left the Forward Operating Base (FOB). The difference is in this order. Kabul looked at the theater and conducted IPB based on that, while Kandahar conducted regional IPB’s and fed that to Kabul, we conducted area IPB in support of combat missions and fed that to both regional and theater IPB’s.3
Weather is anot.
FM 34-60 Counterintelligence Chapter 5 - Counterintelligence Ana.docxvoversbyobersby
FM 34-60 Counterintelligence
Chapter 5 - Counterintelligence Analysis and Production
Chapter 5
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS AND PRODUCTION
GENERAL
Analysis and production is the heart of intelligence. No matter what quality and quantity of information is gathered, it does absolutely no good if the information is not turned into intelligence and disseminated to the commander in time for him to use it in the decision-making process. The same is doubly true of CI. CI agents, interrogators, and MDCI analysts work in teams to gather information, process it into intelligence, put it into products usable at all levels, and disseminate it in time to keep our commander's decision time inside the decision time required by an adversary.
CI analysis and production is focused on three well-defined FIS activities: HUMINT, SIGINT, and IMINT. The process of countering each of these disciplines involves a threat assessment, vulnerability assessment, development of countermeasures options, countermeasures implementation, and countermeasures evaluation. These are referred to as the five-step CI process. (See Section II through Section V of Appendix B.) But they are more than that.
· While each step is a product, it is also a process. Each step can stand alone, yet each depends upon the other for validity. Once begun, the five-step CI process becomes cyclic. The cyclic process does not end, for within each step is the requirement for continuous updating of the CI database. This is necessitated by any new information reflecting change in either the FIS posture, the friendly posture, or both.
· Because FIS activities involve collection, analysis, and production and are themselves multi-disciplined, efforts to counter FIS activities will likewise be multi-disciplined and will require collection, analysis, and production in order to be successful. The analyst will be able to produce a truly multi-disciplined product only if collection is productive.
· Collection is a single discipline function and the attendant initial analysis is likewise a single discipline. The fusion and refined analysis of individual disciplines occurs at various echelons of command, specifically the ACE at theater, corps, and division and at the Army CI Center, 902d MI Group, Fort Meade, MD.
CI analysis is by no means exclusive to Army agencies, but is a crucial activity of DOD. CI analysis is performed at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), as well as other federal agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), FBI, and the National CI Center. CI analysis must be performed by highly trained, experienced, and skilled analysts using the latest technology and modern methods of planning and directing, processing, producing, and disseminating.
C-HUMINT: HUMINT analysis focuses not only upon the FIS entity or entities operating in the area but also upon the intelligence product most likely being developed through their collection activities. The analytical effort should attempt ...
This is a presentation delivered by Brigadier Richard Stanford and Professor Jonathan Githens-Mazer, at the RUSI Defence Information Superiority Conference 2013.
Nine books later most still do not get it -- secret intelligence is largely waste -- unprocessed technical collection that feeds Congressional pork, nothing more.
INTL304 – Intelligence CollectionStrategic and Tactical Intelligen.docxdoylymaura
INTL304 – Intelligence Collection
Strategic and Tactical Intelligence Collection Requirements:
In this first week you will be looking at the differences between strategic and tactical intelligence collection, which address quite different problems and have different pressures and demands. To complete this discussion board you should review IIE Part 3 (3.doc), Strategic Intelligence, review the IPB, and CIA collection operations. Also review chapter 12 in the Clark book.
Once you are prepared please address the following question: Your initial post should be a substantive 250+ words, student responses 250+ words
Identify at least 5 significant differences (there are many more) between intelligence collection for strategic analysis and intelligence collection for tactical military requirements. Remember to take a strategic view of this question. Think about source of requirements, tasking of platforms, turnaround times, the effect on analysis, collection planning, etc.
Use examples, demonstrate you have read the materials, and apply critical thinking skills to earn maximum points on this board. Show your sources as well...it assists in the rigor of your thinking. You are welcome to draw on additional readings, but your work must at least reflect that you've completed the required readings.
Student Response #1 – Michael
One of the many significant differences between strategic and tactical intelligence is what it is used for and who the major consumers are for each type. Strategic intelligence is used to create strategy, plans and policy at the nation and theater level and created by national security issues.1 Where tactical intelligence is used for planning and conducting tactical operations and used by field commanders.2 This creates a completely different consumer set for each type of information produced.
Another difference is how Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) is conducted. For strategic levels the theater is evaluated and the doctrinal principles are applied in a long range large scale model. This means that every aspect of the theater is looked at from geography to the local belief systems and the overall operational plan (example: Enduring Freedom) is created and sent to the tactical units. IPB for the tactical units is what I and my team did in Afghanistan. As the ISR collection manager I used every asset I had available to collect on the terrain and saturate the target area with ISR. Mean while my team dug though the databases and HUMINT information available and created target packages. Each time we did a major air assault we had nine to ten weeks of collection going on before the troops left the Forward Operating Base (FOB). The difference is in this order. Kabul looked at the theater and conducted IPB based on that, while Kandahar conducted regional IPB’s and fed that to Kabul, we conducted area IPB in support of combat missions and fed that to both regional and theater IPB’s.3
Weather is anot.
FM 34-60 Counterintelligence Chapter 5 - Counterintelligence Ana.docxvoversbyobersby
FM 34-60 Counterintelligence
Chapter 5 - Counterintelligence Analysis and Production
Chapter 5
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS AND PRODUCTION
GENERAL
Analysis and production is the heart of intelligence. No matter what quality and quantity of information is gathered, it does absolutely no good if the information is not turned into intelligence and disseminated to the commander in time for him to use it in the decision-making process. The same is doubly true of CI. CI agents, interrogators, and MDCI analysts work in teams to gather information, process it into intelligence, put it into products usable at all levels, and disseminate it in time to keep our commander's decision time inside the decision time required by an adversary.
CI analysis and production is focused on three well-defined FIS activities: HUMINT, SIGINT, and IMINT. The process of countering each of these disciplines involves a threat assessment, vulnerability assessment, development of countermeasures options, countermeasures implementation, and countermeasures evaluation. These are referred to as the five-step CI process. (See Section II through Section V of Appendix B.) But they are more than that.
· While each step is a product, it is also a process. Each step can stand alone, yet each depends upon the other for validity. Once begun, the five-step CI process becomes cyclic. The cyclic process does not end, for within each step is the requirement for continuous updating of the CI database. This is necessitated by any new information reflecting change in either the FIS posture, the friendly posture, or both.
· Because FIS activities involve collection, analysis, and production and are themselves multi-disciplined, efforts to counter FIS activities will likewise be multi-disciplined and will require collection, analysis, and production in order to be successful. The analyst will be able to produce a truly multi-disciplined product only if collection is productive.
· Collection is a single discipline function and the attendant initial analysis is likewise a single discipline. The fusion and refined analysis of individual disciplines occurs at various echelons of command, specifically the ACE at theater, corps, and division and at the Army CI Center, 902d MI Group, Fort Meade, MD.
CI analysis is by no means exclusive to Army agencies, but is a crucial activity of DOD. CI analysis is performed at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), as well as other federal agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), FBI, and the National CI Center. CI analysis must be performed by highly trained, experienced, and skilled analysts using the latest technology and modern methods of planning and directing, processing, producing, and disseminating.
C-HUMINT: HUMINT analysis focuses not only upon the FIS entity or entities operating in the area but also upon the intelligence product most likely being developed through their collection activities. The analytical effort should attempt ...
This is a presentation delivered by Brigadier Richard Stanford and Professor Jonathan Githens-Mazer, at the RUSI Defence Information Superiority Conference 2013.
Lecture 8 - Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition - CyberStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, Michael Sulmeyer, cybercom,USCYBERCOM
acquisition, ash carter, Technology, Innovation and Modern War, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, kill chain, max boot, military innovation, ms&e296, raj shah, requirements, stanford, Steve blank, China
12/2/12 9:44 PMPSI
Page 1 of 19http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/print.aspx?d=/books/gpg/…2fdoc.aspx%3fd%3d%2fbooks%2fgpg%2fC8944%2fC8944-55.xml&print=true
Loch K. Johnson. Strategic Intelligence - 2. Westport, CT: Praeger
Publishers, . http://www.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/.
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE?
Arthur S. Hulnick
NO CONCEPT IS MORE DEEPLY ENSHRINED IN the literature than that of the “intelligence
cycle.” Readers can see this clearly from the other chapters in this volume. I
studied the intelligence cycle as an undergraduate in Sherman Kent's book on
strategic intelligence and then later when I attended the U.S. Air Force
Intelligence School in 1957. In 1965, in the training courses required by the
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), I studied it yet again. When it came time to
start writing about intelligence, a practice I began in my later years in the CIA, I
realized that there were serious problems with the intelligence cycle. It is really
not a very good description of the ways in which the intelligence process works.
Additionally, it ignores two main parts of intelligence work, counterintelligence
and covert action. There is an alternative view.
The First Step
The intelligence cycle is so nicely described in other chapters that there seems
no need to go over it here. So, let us start at the beginning and look at what is
wrong. The notion that policy makers, or intelligence consumers, as they are
sometimes called, provide guidance to intelligence managers to begin the
intelligence process is incorrect. Policy consumers do sometimes indicate their
main concerns to intelligence managers, but often they assume that the
intelligence system will alert them to problems, or provide judgments about the
future. Consumers will sometimes tell intelligence managers what they are
worried about, or the direction in which they intend to take policy—but not
always.
Still, it is usually not too difficult for intelligence managers to learn what policy
makers are up to, but the managers often have to take the initiative to obtain
the information. If intelligence managers at various levels are in touch with their
policy counterparts, this sharing of information may work quite well. Over the
years, intelligence managers have tried to systematize this process by asking
policy officials to provide specifics on their concerns. In the Carter
administration, for example, a system of National Intelligence Topics (NITs) was
created as a way of soliciting guidance for intelligence. Later, they were called
Key Intelligence Questions (KIQs). In some cases, when policy consumers failed
to submit NITs or KIQs, managers had to resort to sending policy officials a list
of topics, asking them to cross out the ones they thought were not necessary,
or adding those they wanted to add to the list. Even then, the lists were
sometimes ignored.
1
2
http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doc.aspx?d=/books/gpg/C8944/C8944-55.xml#C8944-175.
Failed attempt to get the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (today the Director of National Intelligence) to be serious about producing decision-support instead of simply spending money wantonly.
On today's increasingly militarized Internet, companies, non-profits, activists, and individual hackers are forced to melee with nation-state class adversaries. Just as one should never bring a knife to a gunfight, a network defender should not rely on tired maxims such as “perimeter defense” and “defense in depth”. Today’s adversaries are well past that. This webinar provides:
- Key insights into what we call the Library of Sparta - the collective written expertise codified into military doctrine. Hidden in plain sight, vast free libraries contain the time-tested wisdom of combat at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels.
- Better understanding on how adversaries will target your organization, and it will help you to employ military processes and strategies in your defensive operations.
- Provide you with new approaches and examples about how to translate and employ doctrinal concepts in your current operations.
Team Apollo - 2021 Technology, Innovation & Great Power CompetitionStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, space force
Lecture 7 - Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition - SpaceStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, space, space force, general Raymond, space command
Lecture 4- Technology, Innovation and Great Power CompetitionStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, semiconductors, china, applied materials
Social Media Monitoring tools as an OSINT platform for intelligenceE Hacking
This whitepaper discusses how social media monitoring tools can be applied as powerful and cost effective Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) platforms; and how they can support collection and analysis of relevant and targeted information relating to counter-terrorism, criminal and political open sources.
National cybersecurity capacity building framework for countries in a transit...Mohamed Ben Naseir
National Cybersecurity Capacity Building Framework for Countries in a Transitional Phase
Topics: Business Modeling and Business Process Management; Maturity Models for EA Artefacts and Processes; Models and Frameworks
In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS, 841-849, 2020.
Alt. GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using ...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Lecture 8 - Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition - CyberStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, Michael Sulmeyer, cybercom,USCYBERCOM
acquisition, ash carter, Technology, Innovation and Modern War, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, kill chain, max boot, military innovation, ms&e296, raj shah, requirements, stanford, Steve blank, China
12/2/12 9:44 PMPSI
Page 1 of 19http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/print.aspx?d=/books/gpg/…2fdoc.aspx%3fd%3d%2fbooks%2fgpg%2fC8944%2fC8944-55.xml&print=true
Loch K. Johnson. Strategic Intelligence - 2. Westport, CT: Praeger
Publishers, . http://www.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/.
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE?
Arthur S. Hulnick
NO CONCEPT IS MORE DEEPLY ENSHRINED IN the literature than that of the “intelligence
cycle.” Readers can see this clearly from the other chapters in this volume. I
studied the intelligence cycle as an undergraduate in Sherman Kent's book on
strategic intelligence and then later when I attended the U.S. Air Force
Intelligence School in 1957. In 1965, in the training courses required by the
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), I studied it yet again. When it came time to
start writing about intelligence, a practice I began in my later years in the CIA, I
realized that there were serious problems with the intelligence cycle. It is really
not a very good description of the ways in which the intelligence process works.
Additionally, it ignores two main parts of intelligence work, counterintelligence
and covert action. There is an alternative view.
The First Step
The intelligence cycle is so nicely described in other chapters that there seems
no need to go over it here. So, let us start at the beginning and look at what is
wrong. The notion that policy makers, or intelligence consumers, as they are
sometimes called, provide guidance to intelligence managers to begin the
intelligence process is incorrect. Policy consumers do sometimes indicate their
main concerns to intelligence managers, but often they assume that the
intelligence system will alert them to problems, or provide judgments about the
future. Consumers will sometimes tell intelligence managers what they are
worried about, or the direction in which they intend to take policy—but not
always.
Still, it is usually not too difficult for intelligence managers to learn what policy
makers are up to, but the managers often have to take the initiative to obtain
the information. If intelligence managers at various levels are in touch with their
policy counterparts, this sharing of information may work quite well. Over the
years, intelligence managers have tried to systematize this process by asking
policy officials to provide specifics on their concerns. In the Carter
administration, for example, a system of National Intelligence Topics (NITs) was
created as a way of soliciting guidance for intelligence. Later, they were called
Key Intelligence Questions (KIQs). In some cases, when policy consumers failed
to submit NITs or KIQs, managers had to resort to sending policy officials a list
of topics, asking them to cross out the ones they thought were not necessary,
or adding those they wanted to add to the list. Even then, the lists were
sometimes ignored.
1
2
http://psi.praeger.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doc.aspx?d=/books/gpg/C8944/C8944-55.xml#C8944-175.
Failed attempt to get the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (today the Director of National Intelligence) to be serious about producing decision-support instead of simply spending money wantonly.
On today's increasingly militarized Internet, companies, non-profits, activists, and individual hackers are forced to melee with nation-state class adversaries. Just as one should never bring a knife to a gunfight, a network defender should not rely on tired maxims such as “perimeter defense” and “defense in depth”. Today’s adversaries are well past that. This webinar provides:
- Key insights into what we call the Library of Sparta - the collective written expertise codified into military doctrine. Hidden in plain sight, vast free libraries contain the time-tested wisdom of combat at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels.
- Better understanding on how adversaries will target your organization, and it will help you to employ military processes and strategies in your defensive operations.
- Provide you with new approaches and examples about how to translate and employ doctrinal concepts in your current operations.
Team Apollo - 2021 Technology, Innovation & Great Power CompetitionStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, space force
Lecture 7 - Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition - SpaceStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, AI, ML, AI/ML, china, unmanned, autonomy, space, space force, general Raymond, space command
Lecture 4- Technology, Innovation and Great Power CompetitionStanford University
Technology, Innovation and Great Power Competition,TIGPC, Gordian knot Center, DIME-FIL, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, ms&e296, raj shah, stanford, Steve blank, semiconductors, china, applied materials
Social Media Monitoring tools as an OSINT platform for intelligenceE Hacking
This whitepaper discusses how social media monitoring tools can be applied as powerful and cost effective Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) platforms; and how they can support collection and analysis of relevant and targeted information relating to counter-terrorism, criminal and political open sources.
National cybersecurity capacity building framework for countries in a transit...Mohamed Ben Naseir
National Cybersecurity Capacity Building Framework for Countries in a Transitional Phase
Topics: Business Modeling and Business Process Management; Maturity Models for EA Artefacts and Processes; Models and Frameworks
In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS, 841-849, 2020.
Alt. GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using ...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 6DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 6. In this session, we will cover Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI webinar offers an in-depth exploration of leveraging cutting-edge technologies for test automation within the UiPath platform. Attendees will delve into the integration of generative AI, a test automation solution, with Open AI advanced natural language processing capabilities.
Throughout the session, participants will discover how this synergy empowers testers to automate repetitive tasks, enhance testing accuracy, and expedite the software testing life cycle. Topics covered include the seamless integration process, practical use cases, and the benefits of harnessing AI-driven automation for UiPath testing initiatives. By attending this webinar, testers, and automation professionals can gain valuable insights into harnessing the power of AI to optimize their test automation workflows within the UiPath ecosystem, ultimately driving efficiency and quality in software development processes.
What will you get from this session?
1. Insights into integrating generative AI.
2. Understanding how this integration enhances test automation within the UiPath platform
3. Practical demonstrations
4. Exploration of real-world use cases illustrating the benefits of AI-driven test automation for UiPath
Topics covered:
What is generative AI
Test Automation with generative AI and Open AI.
UiPath integration with generative AI
Speaker:
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using Deplo...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
GraphRAG is All You need? LLM & Knowledge GraphGuy Korland
Guy Korland, CEO and Co-founder of FalkorDB, will review two articles on the integration of language models with knowledge graphs.
1. Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08302
2. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG paper and a review paper on various uses of knowledge graphs:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/graphrag-unlocking-llm-discovery-on-narrative-private-data/
GridMate - End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid...ThomasParaiso2
End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid regressions. In this session, we share our journey building an E2E testing pipeline for GridMate components (LWC and Aura) using Cypress, JSForce, FakerJS…
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysAdtran
At WSTS 2024, Alon Stern explored the topic of parametric holdover and explained how recent research findings can be implemented in real-world PNT networks to achieve 100 nanoseconds of accuracy for up to 100 days.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
1. Lawrence D. Dietz, COL (R), USAR
Adjunct Professor
American Military University
Photo
Source:http://www.history.army.mil/books/A
MH-V2/AMH%20V2/chapter14.htm
2. Forum Week 5: Intelligence Requirements, Collection &
Research
In this Forum you are to address the build-up of
intelligence collection operations against suspected
Taliban and AQ targets in the area around Gardez and
Khost, Afghanistan.
The object is to allow you to apply the fundamentals you
have been covering in class to actual contemporary
operations in a building-block fashion. Be specific and
detailed in your contributions.
3.
4. CO-5 Identify essential tasks of the intelligence
section in collating and evaluating information,
to include that on the enemy.
5.
6. • Echelon of Command
• Available Resources
• Volume of input
• Time
• Categorization and Classification
– Special Forces & The CIA are unique
– SIGINT Classification may preclude distribution;
should it be excluded from the process?
– On the Ground versus Remote
• Role of National Assets
• Effectiveness of ‘reachback’ to higher echelons
7. Consider the work product you will have to develop.
– Know your audience.
– Blend in to the Battle Update Briefing
– Your customers are under a lot of pressure
– The more carefully you plan for processing, analysis and dissemination
the smoother the intelligence process and the greater the contribution
to the operation.
Photo Source: Disney
8. • Consider all aspects of deception to include the importance
of deceiving SIGINT Collectors
• How can the Internet aid in a deception plan?
– Remember the role of Facebook the recent exposure of PLA
Hacking
• Can you really deceive in the Google Earth era?
• Adapt section operations based on the skills of your
personnel.
• How can you encourage more intelligence involvement by
line forces?
– Can personally owned equipment (mobile phone cameras) be
employed to collect tactical intelligence?
• Balance necessity with security.
9. • CIA Article on Testing the Intelligence Cycle through systems
modeling and simulation: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-
the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-
monographs/analytic-culture-in-the-u-s-intelligence-
community/chapter_4_systems_model.htm
• CIA Basic Intro (High School) to the intelligence cycle:
https://www.cia.gov/kids-page/6-12th-grade/who-we-are-what-
we-do/the-intelligence-cycle.html
• FBI Version of the Intelligence Cycle:
http://www.fbi.gov/intelligence/di_cycle.htm
• Source of photo for title slide: Canadian View of the Intelligence
Cycle; http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo8/no1/images/Rivard-fig-2-
eng.jpg
10. Forum Week 6: Tactical Intelligence Support of
Operations
This Forum is intended to pull together the learnings in
tactical intelligence and apply them to the contemporary
battlefield. You should draw on your readings of the
doctrinal publications, Battling the Elements, Koch, and
the readings in the course materials folder. The case study
of Operation Anaconda is a classic vehicle though which
to apply and emphasize the core lessons in tactical
intelligence.
11. CO-6 Evaluate considerations and define the
types of tactical intelligence collection and
assess the impact of deception on collection
operations.
12. • Each type of intelligence has strengths and
weaknesses.
• Consider how to use one source or intelligence type
to confirm intelligence from another source.
• Sometimes unreliable can be the best you can do.
13.
14. • Echelon of Command
• Available Resources
• Volume of input
• Time
• Categorization and Classification
– Special Forces & The CIA are unique
– SIGINT Classification may preclude distribution;
should it be excluded from the process?
– On the Ground versus Remote
• Role of National Assets
• Effectiveness of ‘reachback’ to higher echelons
15. • Incorporate what you learned last week
concerning weather and terrain.
• Would the intelligence picture have changed if
Operational Anaconda was on it’s own and did
not have national asset help or CENTCOM
oversight?
• Was weather less of a factor in Operation
anaconda than for any other previous military
campaign in Afghanistan?
16. • A Time Magazine Guide to Operation Anaconda:
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020318/popup/
• Overview article on Operation Anaconda:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oef-
anaconda.htm
• MIT Seminar write-up featuring Sean Naylor:
http://web.mit.edu/ssp/seminars/wed_archives_06spring/na
ylor.htm
• Asian perspective on Operation Anaconda:
http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DC22Ag01.html
• Source of title slide photo:
http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/Afghanistan/Images/
39.jpg