Read on Twitter
Let’s talk about mistakes in #Intelligence. In general, we trumpet our successes and gloss over our missteps. Yesterday, I made a mistake, in this article:
https://twitter.com/RecordedFuture/status/1344300720783306752?s=20 #thread 1/6
https://twitter.com/RecordedFuture/status/1344300720783306752?s=20 #thread 1/6
As an anecdote, I said Sandworm disclosed @MalwareJake as a former member of NSA's TAO group. This happened for a few reasons: I had just finished @a_greenberg's great book (recency bias), and I equate Sandworm and Shadowbrokers in my mind (conjunction fallacy) 2/6
It may have been a lessor point, but the paper was published, and the mistake was called out. Talk about feeling bad. Motivation behind mistakes is unknown to your audience, who look at these inaccuracies critically, as they should. https://twitter.com/WylieNewmark/status/1344373462161387521?s=20 3/6
So here's the decision point: do I respond with a witty tweetstorm and minimize the issue? There are certainly those who delight in snark, but no. Well informed #feedback is GOOD and mistakes should be admitted. Here's my mea culpa: https://twitter.com/johnwetzel/status/1344381165533278211?s=20 4/6
Intelligence process is designed to combat #bias, yet bias crept into my report. External review and feedback is critical to all intelligence. Even better when you can improve the intelligence report and relationships :) https://twitter.com/WylieNewmark/status/1344381910408187907?s=20 5/6
For me, 2020 was a year of growth and learning. Mistakes, candidly admitted, help us grow and improve. I will certainly make mistakes in 2021, but also aim to improve, both myself and the practice of #Intelligence 6/6 https://twitter.com/likethecoins/status/1344383081139105793?s=20
Postscript: the article and paper were corrected very quickly, and re-posted with a message acknowledging the error. Read it here: https://www.recordedfuture.com/solarwinds-attribution/
