CrowdStrike CEO 在 No Priors 播客泛谈 AI 攻防与 SafeMind，未披露新订单、财务指引或重大产品增量

【播客逐字稿全集 · No Priors (Sarah Guo/Elad Gil)】
单集:The New Apex Predator: CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz on Adversaries Armed With AI Agents
说明:以下为该集逐字稿的**完整原文**(未删改;英文档为 YouTube 自动字幕/节目原文,可能有识别误差)。请就本集内容判断是否构成**可交易**事件 —— 公司/产品/订单/产能/需求/合作/资本开支/高管表态等;泛泛的观点、预测、行业感想不算。若本集无可交易内容,判为不做。

--- 全集原文 ---
For the first time, security is the gas pedal, not the brake. >> How would you describe what you're seeing AI doing for adversaries, >> the new apex predator, is the agency. The same level of capability that a nation state would have just a few years ago, essentially a activist would have today. That has dramatically changed [music] the overall threat environment. What people have to keep in mind is it's not malware anymore. It's prompts. They can basically engineer prompts that would create a totally unique [music] signature of what direction they're going to go in, how they gather information, where they pivot. Everyone's coming to Crowd Strike and others going, "Well, how do you make AI secure so we can go faster in AI?" The only way to fight AI today is with better AI. The defender knows their own [music] systems. The defender has the architectural diagram. The defender has the code. How do you put all of that into something that you can dramatically increase your probability of outsmarting [music] the offensive AI? Hi listeners, welcome back to No Priors. Today Allah and I are here with George Curts. George is the world's first call when there's an incident, a legendary cyber defender, the founder and CEO of Found and then CrowdStrike. We talk about what's happening in cyber security, fighting AI with AI, their internal research effort, Safe Mind, and whether the odds are good for the internet in the next era. Welcome back, George. Thanks so much for doing this. >> It's a pleasure to be here. >> So, uh, it is a sea change period in technology and agents are taking over the enterprise. Uh, CrowdStrike is on the forefront of that. Um, what can you tell us about what you're you're seeing in in the wild right now? I think you have said that uh there are you know two three magnitudes more agents out there taking action in in people's um estates and they're aware of. >> It's been incredible in the enterprise of what we've seen. If you follow the trajectory of the the Frontier Labs and you just look at their own revenue, you can see just how many more agents are out there, whether it's Claude Code or Codeex. Uh they're popping up all over the uh all over the environment. Obviously, there's many other type of agents that are out there, but again, just using that as a proxy and um you know, what we've seen is that they're they're popping up everywhere. And part of the problem in in these enterprises is they have no idea where they're popping up. Shadow AI has become a huge issue for many companies. Um, I know we're going to talk about what the agents are doing and all the bad sort of things that are happening, but just in general, having organizations understand where their AI is taking place and who's doing what and more importantly what identity are they actually operating under uh has been a big challenge in the industry and a big focus for us at Crowd Strike and and trying to crack the code for our customers. >> How would you describe what uh you're seeing AI doing for adversaries? You've described it as flattening the the adversary pyramid before. >> When I think about the the adversaries, I I call it the pyramid of pain. So, if you just imagine the bottom part of the pyramid, the base of the pyramid is really what we call activists. So, you've got the least level of sophistication but the greatest number of adversaries. Then in the middle band of the pyramid, you've got e-crime, you know, more sophisticated um and a few less than all the activists. And then at the top of the pyramid, you've got nation state actors, right? So the most sophisticated but the least number relatively speaking. Well, that has been totally just blown up because really now what we're seeing is the new apex predator is the agent state, not the nation state, it's the agent state. And what the agent state has done, if we think about the the models that are out there um that are bladed, so there there's no real guard rails. It's essentially taken all of these very complex topics and sort of techniques and cost and now flatten the entire pyramid. So the same level of sort of capability that a nation state would have just a few years ago, essentially a activist would have today. And that has dramatically changed the overall threat environment. So what are we seeing? We're seeing more vulnerabilities found and we're seeing faster attacks. And when the attacks come, it's just, you know, it's just one after another. You can see it. It's actually right now it's pretty clear whether it's an AI attack. Um because you can see how fast they're actually iterating. But at some point they're going to introduce that being low and slow and it's going to be more difficult to figure out what's AI and what isn't. But that's what we're seeing and I think that's one of the real challenges that organizations are facing is just the barrage of attacks and the level of sophistication has dramatically increased and ultimately if you know if you give an agent a task with enough time and you know the agent need either needs to get in or it dies. It's going to try to figure out a way to get in and a lot of times it's going to have success. >> Are you seeing a shift in terms of how these adversarial attacks are being made? I know we were talking earlier um we talked a little about open versus closed source models or openw weight models. Are you seeing a shift where most of it is openweight models? Is it a mixture in terms of people using state-of-the-art labs and capabilities? Like what what are people actually using to do these attacks at this point? >> We're seeing a lot of it on the openweight models, right? If you look at I mean just the guardrails on on the latest generation of any of the frontier models. Um to be candid, you can you can barely create a PowerPoint that has cyber security in it. I mean it literally rejects you and bumps you down to a lower model. So what we've seen is you know again if if you look at um GLM if you look at you know Quinn if you look at any of the sort of models that are out there uh they've been very effective in being able to um deal with cyber security and many of the the models are either abladed or specifically built just for cyber might be for red teaming and and those are the type of attacks where you can actually just run these I mean you can run them on. I've got two Spark DGXs at home and you know I've got all the models running and you know whatever I want to do I can do. You want to create ransomware no problem. You want to create a ransomware kit, no issue. Uh you want to deploy, you want to iterate, I mean it's all there for you and you know that is like one step removed from just running it all on your your laptop and we think about where Mac is today. Even the new Macs uh that are coming out right the studios they're going to be incredible AI and machines. So the tip of the spear is going to be what you can run without the guardrails and the frontier models are sort of helpful in in terms of if you needed PowerShell scripts or those sort of things, but certainly you can do a lot of it with the openweight models right now. >> And is there a common ge geography like are mostly attacks coming from a single region? Um are the is there a common attack type? Is it mainly ransomware? Is it something else? Is it fishing campaigns? I'm a little bit curious like has the mix shifted as you've kind of seen the adoption of AI tools? We sort of look at it maybe just reframe the question a little bit because we look at it from an adversary perspective. You know, is it a nation state? Is it e- crime nation state? We sort of, you know, we've come up with these names of bears and pandas depending if they're Russia or, you know, it could be from Iran, kittens and other things. So, uh, but we've seen a lot of attacks. Uh, we see North Korea being very busy, uh, with these sort of attacks. Uh, they they've got to, shall we say, get money into their economy. So they've been very busy on uh you know stealing information uh a lot of it around ransomware and getting paid but um yeah I think overall what we've seen is a lot of uh we've seen obviously out of China a lot of activity using AI and we've also seen it in the e-crime world where um when someone gets onto a system we track breakout time that is if if if they got onto your system how long would it take them to actually break out and pivot and move to a different system generally the system they first land on is not the most interesting. It could be but it's not the most interesting. The crown jewels might be somewhere else. So on a that used to be days and you know hours and now it's minutes. On average it's 29 minutes but we've seen it as quick as 27 seconds. And essentially you know now what we're looking at is the speed of inference. So as soon as they get on the machine you can just see iterating very quickly. And what people have to keep in mind is it's not malware anymore. It's prompts. So they can basically engineer prompts that would uniquely create create a totally unique signature of what direction they're going to go in, how they gather information, where they pivot. Um, which makes it, you know, more challenging to figure all that out. But that that's what we're seeing right now. And it it's across the board from the nation state and e-crime actors for sure. >> You have been um a leader in security since you know Found Crowd the founding of Crowd Strike. Um would you say that there like how do you put the current period of um increase in capability like attacker capability and perhaps defender capability in context right are we in a more adversary dominant world right now like how do you think about the problem overall >> well I think it's one of the most exciting times to be in technology I mean really I've been doing this 30 plus years and you know what I always like to say is that security parallels the slope of the technology curve when When I first got into security, it was a Cisco router and like maybe a website barely, right? There really weren't firewalls. There were these toolkits, TIS toolkit and these other things. Probably dating myself, but um you know, there wasn't much there. And now if you think about the complexity of where we are today with with cloud, with um all of the other uh technologies around AI, I'm not going to go through all of them, but it's a lot more complex today than it was way back then. So you need all these little companies and including big companies that are able to secure all these technologies. So when we think about where we are today, it actually is the most exciting but it also creates the biggest opportunity because the adversaries generally find the gaps or the seams. So they'll find new technologies that maybe that they don't have good tech protection uh that they're taking advantage of things like npm packages. Right? In the old world, as you as you very well know, it was no one in corporate America would just download anything and run it on their computer. It had to be vetted and scanned and all these sort of things. And now we unleash an agent. We give it an identity which is essentially our own or worse. And then we unleash it and we say do whatever you want to do. And by the way, download whatever package you want to download. And obviously these are the kind of things that cause a tremendous amount of exposure. So, we're we're sort of getting to grips >> and nobody's reading any of the production code as it gets. >> No, they're not. I mean, you know, you you see some of these things in the wild and you're scratching your head. You shouldn't be surprised. I mean, it was like, let's give it a task and we'll we'll come back in a few days and we'll hope it all worked. Nobody's watching it. Nobody understands what it's doing. Uh, and it's problematic. So, you know, we can we can talk about sort of the uh explanability of what these agents are doing, which is going to be really important. Um, but it it right now it's like a black box and nobody knows what's going on. They hope, you know, something happens and pops out on the on the other side of it. But it's it's it's a great time to be in technology. AI is fundamentally going to change the world and the Frontier Labs are doing amazing things. But ultimately, it's going to come down to security enabling these sort of technologies. And for the first time, security is the gas pedal, not the brake. And that's what we're seeing. >> What is the moment that you realized this inflection was happening, at least in the security world? And I think for a lot of people kind of the hugging face open AAI issue was kind of like a big you know moment where people kind of realized there's a big sea shift in terms of capabilities and technology and what could happen and to your point are things being monitored etc. Was was that a seminal moment for you or what are some of the seminal moments? >> Let me ask you a question first. So what was your big takeaway from hugging face >> that anybody running frontier models needs to um uh be careful of their environment quality and have very good ongoing production monitoring. >> Yeah. That is the takeaway. But I think what a lot of people would say is well this was the the first agentic endto-end attack. All true and you kind of look at you know what these things were doing and you know people uh talk about them you know hiding themselves and you know trying to basically survive to the next generation and those sort of things. All true. My biggest takeaway was that the defenders didn't have the same capabilities as the offense. Okay. Now, you would look at this and say the airbags were off because this was an experiment where the agents, you know, the guardrails were down, the airbags were off, and ultimately they found a way out of the sandbox. But the reality was hugging face, you know, when the first thing they did was they went to the Frontier models and they said, "What? Like, is this thing real? What's going on?" And they got refused, right? Because airbags were on over there. So, what did they have to do? They actually had to go to openweight models to kind of sift through all this data and figure it out. So, a big piece for me is to is to basically make sure that defenders have the same level of a frontier defensive AI as as what the offense is is using. And that was a big takeaway uh for me and and part of the things that that CrowdStrike is working. And is that hard in the context that you mentioned of um the guardrails being so strong on the state-of-the-art labs models that to some extent you could argue there aren't that those same defensive capabilities available to every enterprise. In other words, the fact that they had to go to openweight models kind of suggests that you can't actually do it currently with the labs. And so the question then how do you adopt that? Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean like you you try to make a PowerPoint in in with a frontier model around cyber security and it refuses you. So, you know, this is part of why we created Safe Mind and and our and our red and blue models just for that reason because we wanted to give uh frontier caliber defenses uh to our customers that allow them to operate without sort of all these sort of refusals. Um and and I think that's going to be an important element going forward for for many companies. I think um I guess back to the offense versus defense side, it seems like with every technology shift, offensive capabilities are always a little bit ahead when you have a big change in how things are done for a few reasons. I mean, one of them is just with offense, it can be very directive. I need to go do X. While with defense, it's a broad surface area you need to cover. So, to some extent, you need to cover more stuff. And then secondly, it's just technology adoption and diffusion, right? You are one attack. You are a set of attackers. you know what you're going after versus the diffuse ecosystem of enterprises that you need to defend against. How does Crow Strike think about ensuring that those defensive capabilities are very broadly available? >> Well, this is one of the things that we focused on. Uh we created our own cyber super intelligence labs before the term was was popular, I might say. Um so I guess we we kind of nailed that one. But essentially what we've done is we've created our own basically frontier type type lab that is totally focused on uh security models both red and blue and the harness and we call it safe mine as a system but we've got red tempest and blue solano those are the two models now we worked extensively with Nvidia on this and uh we basically leverage we leverage a few model types but Neotron is one of the main models that we leverage on on the blue side and when We sat down with them and I sat down with Jensen. We were working on it for the last 6 months and we kind of went through how this would work and essentially to your point like you know the defense always seems to be one step behind. So the big part of of what we're doing is we're iterating the red and the blue. So for our customers we have a view of what their environment looks like and then and this was Jensen sort of insisting like you have to have a digital twin. If you look at other industries, they have digital twins and he goes, you have to have one security. So, we built a digital twin where we can take all of the information that we know about a customer's environment. We can basically recreate that in a virtual world and then we can iterate the models and loop the models where red continually is focused on getting in until it runs out of turns because blue Solano has actually figured out what red was doing. And that's really the way I think we have to keep up with uh the threats because red is constantly iterating and you're going to have to have this loop in place. >> Uh that makes sense. I mean even just from a classic cyber security perspective like knowing your environment is one of the um only advantages that you have as a defender as well as as as CrowdStrike has pioneered like you know the ability to share intelligence and understanding of the adversary right um actually I I think it'd be useful to just like zoom out and describe like uh you know the the uh key offerings and investments on the R&D side that Crowdstrike is making today because I think like it's a it's massive cyber player. Um, but I think the the root of like endpoint protection and understanding the adversary might be an outdated view. >> Yeah, I think that's right. You know, we we've really, you know, probably over the last, you know, four or five years, I guess, really moved into, you know, much broader platform capabilities. We've got 33 modules today. And, you know, ultimately when I started the company, we had one module and now we've got 33. We build capabilities not only across endpoint but around cloud uh IT identity um and many different areas that are out there. So if you look at where we've made a lot of investments in some of the things that we just talked about at our latest user conference Falcon um it was around what we call aid. So we pioneered EDR endpoint detection response which a lot of it in the early days was a computer and a human. Um and then you know we've added obviously many more things around that and prevention and all those sort of things. But when you look at what an agent is doing it's it's essentially a superhuman. It has an identity. It has access to compute. It runs on your computer. Uh or it can run in a container. Um it has access to data. It has networking capabilities. Right. So what we wanted to be able to do is to first find all of this rogue and shadow AI because nobody knew where it was. Like back to your point, you got to know what your environment looks like. And then two, we can instrument from the birth of an agent what that agent does. So if you're in, you know, claw cloud code, you start an agent, has sub agents, it has tool calls, it, you know, goes to an MCP server, it pulls data, whatever it's doing, we can actually tell you the entire chain of events and that's incredibly important and then be able to add policy and blocking rules around those. Um, so we've spent a lot of time in that area and I think from a business perspective if you look at the stats right now on average today, which I actually think is low, but they say you can have 90 different agents, you know, as as an employee. Um, well, that can be a much bigger opportunity than just EDR for us. So that's one area that we've been focused on. The um the second area then as I mentioned is creating this super intelligence lab and creating our own frontier models. Again our models we we we start with existing models like uh a Neotron class you know mostly the three class of Neotron. We're helping them sort of fine-tune some of the things we need for the four that's coming out. Um but then you know we kind of you know post train them and and using all the valuable data that we have over the last 15 years to get the best outcome. And I and I'll say one more thing and I'll pause. The the harness makes a huge difference. Like almost any model we take whether it's Frontier whether it's just an offtheshelf uh openweight model we can get much better results at a way lower cost because of the the harness that we we created that goes with it. So those are some of the big investments. Um, you know, there's more around identity. I'm happy to cover any of those, but let me pause there and see if you had any any other comments or thoughts on those. >> That was going to be one of my um big questions about your lab's investment here, which is I I think a reasonable question to ask about any model training effort is like why isn't that just a frontier? Um, you know, you work with open eye and anthropic uh like capability. Um uh these these labs of course uh they um realize the importance of security and then they have these programs for like vetted defenders be it like Daybreak or sort of mythos access. Why is that insufficient? I mean you have you have a capability argument based on you know harness your ca your understanding internally data. Is there is there anything else structurally that you think is important for an independent security vendor here? >> Yeah I think there's a few things there. So first what what the labs are creating is incredible. I mean where they've come from where what they created it's unbelievable right and we also want to make that available to our customers so the general theory is if you have safe mind and you want to leverage a frontier model great we can we can leverage that u if you want to leverage our models fantastic our models will be significantly cheaper so just to give you an example um so for general remediation if you use like uh the highest caliber frontier cyber model it probably cost you about $10. Ours is like 3 cents. So there is a huge cost difference um which is important. But then when you look at you know our model because of the way we've postrained it on our data a huge difference is we have the data like there is no Reddit of crowd strike security data. You can create synthetic data but it's it's really not the same as what we have. We got 15 years uh well maybe a little bit less because I started 15 years ago but you know call it over a decade of security data including from our MDR our managed detection response service that has all of the sort of threat and and vulnerability pairings and sort of the attack chains and we've basically created this massive amount of data that we use to train it. So we we're getting great results on it and um I think it is very focused because of the post training you know again it's not going to cure cancer but it's going to give you great results for security. That's number one. Number two is there is a safety and trust aspect. We have all of the data from our customers. We've been entrusted with that for the last 15 years. We know how to protect it. We know what they want. We know how they want to use it. they there's a real concern by customers. They don't want all this data going out to the labs. They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it their information being trained on, right? So, we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want um for for their own security program. And this this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers. So again, we're not saying exclude the labs because they have incredible technology, but you can pick what you want or you can route between, you know, the various models, but ultimately we want to give customers choice. >> I think you've also talked a little bit about separation of church and state. You know, the you want to make sure that to some extent there's a neutral third party that can also uh you know, interrogate some of the models that the labs are providing or some of the other open source out there and you know it seems like cross track can definitely play that role as well. So, um, I think the number one factor in security is is is being trusted, being a trusted partner. You know, you can look at the vendors out there. There's obviously a few big guys that are that are out there. There's many security companies, but uh trust is is uh built in drips and lost in buckets. And you know, c customers, they they don't want sort of cowboy activities that may put their their data at risk. And um you you know again I everybody's do trying to do the best they can but I our whole focus right and I think focus is incredibly important in any business. Our whole focus is security and our whole focus is keeping our customers safe and we're not we're not trying to solve the world's problems in in AI and other areas. So I think that is is certainly an advantage for us. >> If you were to think out two years from now, what do you think is the state of the security world? Like what do you think has shifted from this point forward? Certainly within two years you're going to have local models that are all running on people's computers. Um you know you may have a mixture of local models plus sort of last mile routing into into Frontiers in terms of what they look like. You're going to have a lot more openweight models. Um you know you can just see the shift in the tokens you know over the last 6 months. >> What what is the shift that you're seeing and how what's the order of magnitude there? How long do you think that continues for? >> I talked to CIOS you know almost every day. I had dinner with one tonight from big bank in New York and and basically the comment is you know we we we got into AI we went all in great the costs were out of control you know token maxing you know stopped when people got big bills and you know I said well what how do you think about this like what are you going to do and they said the models are so the openweight models right now are so good even if they're three months behind it's plenty for what we need and one of the customers comments and and they know I'm into Formula 1. They said any Formula 1 activity that we need for the bank will go to the frontier. Like if it's alpha and we're making money and it's like, you know, super important, we'll pay the money. Not no big deal. But for all the other things, like it's really expensive and we're going to create all of our own openweight models, you know, and do more post training on them and those sort of things that that's the way they're going to operate. And I firmly believe that. I'm seeing that in customer after customer that that's that's that's the way they're going to go and I think you know part of some of the challenges in the current environment is I think people are are all seeing that and you know there there is some concern you know at the frontier level of of what's going to take place >> and so I guess on the openweight model one of the uh statements that tends to be made is that they are at least in part distilled from the labs in other words you have Chinese open source players who are effectively training their models against that enthropic or open AI model or you know other sort of frontier models. Uh and many of those labs are now trying to roll out anti-distillation efforts. So they're trying to build into the model the capability to not get distilled. Do you think it's just sort of a back and forth where the capabilities keep going almost like offense and defense and cyber or what's your prediction in terms of the state of distillation in two years or you know within some reasonable time frame? >> I mean I guess my first comment is what were the frontier models distilling when they got all that information? I mean, we know all of the, you know, sort of the lawsuits around where the data came from and and how that unfolded, right? So, we kind of start from that. >> So, it's like a fine liquor. It's triple distilled, you know. So, >> it's triple distilled. Exactly. Like, so where where does the distillation start from, you know? Um, so I think it it it is what it is, but the the the labs certainly are focused on on trying to prevent distillation and and obviously, you know, when you look at the Chinese models that are out there, there's a lot of distillation takes there's factories of systems that are, you know, bouncing all over the internet distilling this. I I think the challenge is that the genies out of the bottle. I mean, there there's a lot of distillation already taking place. The models are very good, but we also have to give credit where it's due. if if you don't have all the chips and you have to be resourceful and you still want to have top models, you know, I think there's some innovative things that are taking place outside of the US and we got to be mindful of that, right? Um, so yes, it's hard. I I think it's going to be hard to put the genie back in the bottle on distillation. They're going to do the best they can, but um, you know, a lot of the models are are, you know, I I think now you what does it look like in two years? I don't know. you you've got great models today. They they can last for a while and you have a lot of data that's already packed into them. So, we'll we'll see how it unfolds. I I wish I had the crystal ball on that one. >> Oh, I was just curious. And then I guess another it's always hard to predict these things, but I'm a little bit curious. Do you think there's structural advantages for Chinese companies to stay at the frontier of at least open source and open weights or do you think uh US openweight models are likely to catch up in the near term? >> Well, there are some openweight models coming out. I'm I'm sure you you know you may be invested in them as well. Um I I think having great US openweight models is going to be very important. So, you know, one of the reasons why we worked with with Nvidia was, of course, Neimotron is openweight and open source, not just openweight, but having other alternatives is going to be very important. And I think there's, you know, again, just being in technology long enough, you kind of look at how things unfold like the the operating system of the internet is Linux, like period. Okay? And there's a reason for that. And there's going to be an operating system of AI. And it's pro in my mind it's going to be, you know, an open- source open weight when that happens and how it all unfolds. I mean, we'll see. And it doesn't mean there isn't room for any frontier model. It doesn't mean that people are not going to make a bunch of money off it. You know, the application stack sort of around it. Um, you know, the harnesses and how things are connected and how you think about enterprise, all those sort of things are going to be really important, but ultimately like there's just too much cost involved right now. And and when you look at a lot of the these frontier models, I mean, they're being commoditized. If the Chinese models are three months behind, you know, a lot of companies are going like three months is not what what am I going to get out of it? I does everything I want. And that's the challenge. a a top five financial said to me um uh recently like a you know a large technology buyer there um that uh there was no chance that their organization had the capability to absorb a new model release every 10 days anyway and so 3 months behind you know was uh uh faster than the acceptable like regulated pace of their organization. So it made no difference to them to to to some degree. Um I I think open is here to stay as a big part of the puzzle. Uh you know one one question I I know we're going to keep asking you to look into the future and it's kind of impossible but given your history in in security. This is the first time in my career in technology where some very uh smart well-educated technologists are like we need to turn the internet off. we just got to air gap everything because the internet is gonna fall apart in the next year and will be unsafe for critical systems to touch it. Um how how much do you believe that to be like a reasonable probability in the future where there are lots of critical systems that society cannot rely on touching the internet? I mean, I think it's nonsense, you know, uh like is security and and what agents can do and and the risk that they pose, is that serious? Of course, that's serious business. We should all look at that and go, "Yeah, we got to make sure that we lock things down, you know, but is the world going to end because of these agents anytime soon?" No. And when you look at what the agents are doing, I I think there's this sort of mythical view of what an agent does. It's like an agent doesn't just beam itself from your computer to another computer. It actually just does the same thing a human would do just better and faster, right? So if you think about what companies like Crowd Strike have done for a long time, it we prevent against these sort of attacks. Now they might come faster. There might be, you know, more lower level sort of vulnerabilities chained together and those sort of things. great um you know great for the adversary not great for the defender but it's building the technology that um can deal with all these sort of attacks so what has AI done it's created more vulnerability so you have more of them and you know you have more exploitation coming faster so it's more and faster but it there isn't like a unique class that all of a sudden an agent just beams itself somewhere and I think people just get wrapped around the axle of like there's some new class of technique that's taken there. There isn't it's just been trained on what we know. It hasn't developed its own yet. And that's why I kind of look at it and go security again is going to be an enabler for AI, which I think is incredibly important for the security industry because normally it's, you know, you're putting the brakes on. You know, we have to take time. You're not letting the business run as fast as they want. And now everyone's coming to to CrowdStrike and and others going, "Well, how do you make AI secure so we can go faster in AI?" So that that's the way I would look at it. Like AI is here to stay. I think some of the the concern is there and it should be there, but sort of like there's a lot of um uh kind of dumerism around some of this stuff and I I just don't think it's it's necessarily warranted. I know you're also um you know sometimes involved with companies as an angel investor and you know other parts of the ecosystem. Are there other areas that you're very excited about right now in terms of key areas of change or focus in the AI world in addition to the security world? Like what are some of the things that you think are really exciting that either just happened or are coming? >> I think you know chips used to be kind of not in fashion. Obviously we we know they are in fashion today and you're only going to need more of them and faster of them and and more specialized. And I I do think there will be some big breakthroughs in the chip world. You know, when we think about just sort of the speed, just take, you know, Moore's law might be a bit da but dated, but at the end of the day, you know, they they the chips came out and things just got faster and cheaper. I don't know the trajectory, but I can guarantee you it's going to be faster and cheaper in the future like that. I I can see. So as these specialized chips are developed that you know focus in maybe particular areas as new science is developed around the mathematics um you know there can be step function increases in performance you know uh less power those sort of things. So I think chips is a big one. The the openweight models um I think there's a lot of room to grow certainly the US models and I do think there's going to be a lot of advancements in taking these models and shrinking them down you know and and and being able to run them on your phone as an example. So I I mean we probably all know the history remember the days where you know it took a football fieldsized room of computers to to you know launch the space you know first rocket like we have more power in our iPhone today than than they had in the entire room. So that's going to come and I think the area where you can make AI faster, cheaper, more efficient and and you bring it to the desktop and you bring it to the the the phone where a you're doing it at the edge. I think all of those are sort of exciting opportunities because that's really where I see you know you you're probably going to have a hybrid model but you can do a lot of it now locally and again just looking at the um you know the TPUs, NPUs, etc. like these are they're they're all on systems that we have today and and a lot of times they're going to waste but I I don't think they're going to be going to waste that that much longer >> just because it is you know your job to think ambitiously about what the defenders can do all day uh I I wouldn't say like AI def uh sorry defenders security defenders are doomers in that specific term but they're like generally kind of dow and like pretty pessimistic about the um [clears throat] cat-and- mouse game getting any better in their favor. Can you can you make your best case for like actually you know if people invest correctly and we make better products and we automate many like is there a version where is actually defense dominant over the next decade? I think it can be because if we again just with with the concepts that uh you know are they're not necessarily new or unique but that the the ability to always rapidly understand what the offense is doing and making sure that your defense is keeps up with it is is going to be the key. I mean it it it's sort of the the modernday version of the the hacking exposed book that that I co-authored many years ago which was like if you show people how the offense works the defense is going to be a lot better. Now, that was a much slower sort of tempo than it is today, but I think that's going to be important. And as an industry, making sure, this is a key thing for us, and and I really drill this home with with our our team at CrowdStrike, is you've got to give as good or better capabilities to the defender than what the offense has. And if you're just slightly better, you know, just mathematically, you're still going to have an advantage. And I think again, it's always going to be a cat-and- mouse game, but being really smart about it is going to be important. The only way to fight AI today is with better AI. And you know, you you you've got to use the advantages you have. The defender knows their own systems. The defender has the architectural diagrams. The defender has the code, right? So, how do you put all of that into something that you can dramatically increase your probability of outsmarting the offensive AI? >> The only tactical thing I I think is an interesting idea is the idea that um you could over time if if it is going to be mostly agent written code, you could enforce better security architecture. Um and you know perhaps fear of vulnerabilities or a lot of people where you know formal verification has always been enormously niche right but even even short of that like okay why is all the software insecure because you know one one big reason is that engineers are um you know there's a limited number of them with limited capacity and we're all trying to move very quickly but if you can scale at the speed of compute or your willingness to spend and agents have infinite patience like maybe we could actually end up with more secure software over time. It's an interesting hope. >> I I think there there is like the industry is at a point now where where the code is is probably good enough where you're going to get definitely some benefits but again the code was was also trained in other area like it was trained on stuff that you know may have had issues. So you know I I I have my own developer license. I I build my own sort of apps and things like Claude and and you know I have my own security agent that reviews the code and it's like well Claude just created the code but then Claude is now with its security app going well that code is insecure well you just created it like why did you just do that in the first part you know maybe there's some optimization but I think um what people don't necessarily realize uh is that even with with zero vulnerabilities which I hope the industry can get there you're still going to have breaches Because a lot of what we see people today doing is they're not necessarily breaking in, they're logging in. There's such an issue around identity. But at the end of the day, if we can get better code and we can have less vulnerabilities and we can ripple that through, that'll be great. The challenge is it's such a long tail. You take Microsoft as an example just because of of all of the the um you know compatibility that they want to maintain going backwards backward compatibility. You know, there's things that never kind of get fixed or or modernized. And you know, that's just one important element in our ecosystem, but think about all the other software that's out there. You're not going to just fix it all overnight. So, it's going to be a really long tail. >> You've been running CrowdStrike for uh 15 years and before that you were an entrepreneur. Um uh security, I I've always loved security because like we're never as a business person, it's both an interesting and important mission and as a business person like this problem is not going away, right? Um but uh I I feel many comp many CEOs of large established public companies uh are feeling a little bit unmed in this period of time because so much of the value that they have built uh in their incumbency is is being challenged. Like how do you how do you you know think about keeping yourself up to date, keeping the organization agile, continuing to win? Any any general advice on that? Yeah, h happy to jump into that. So, first I think you have to recognize it's a different operating model and cadence, you know, we've got thousands and thousands of people, right? And when you think about some of the AI native companies that just started, they have a handful of people, you know, Claude is running all day. They've got agents doing all kinds of stuff. like that's the that's the new world which is great but you you can't be in a uh not that we are but you can't be in like the waterfall mentality of development like things pop out a year later like you're going to be out of business. So I think you first have to realize that having these massive teams and these long schedules like that is not going to cut it. So having smaller teams that are, [clears throat] you know, squads or, you know, smaller groups that are focused on a problem, they can leverage AI, but you can't have like thousands of people show up to solve a problem. You got to have a smaller team to be able to do that. And we've done that. We've done that with like our Falcon Guardian product. And to your point, like I was personally involved, you know, had three day a week meetings. I was involved in the design of it. It's like here's what we're doing. Like change this, change that. And you got to get back to your like startup roots because it it it takes that level of change you know in in a bigger company and there are many companies that are much bigger than we are and you know you just can't be slow and plotting. So that's number one is to realize that the operating model and cadence is changing and you got to change what you got to disrupt yourself internally and then you just have to look at like what well what are your emotes like if you're a system of record it's a pretty big moat. We're we're a security system of record, right? And we have everyone's data for many years. And by the way, we're net data creators. Our our sensors, we call them security agents, right? But I mean like not to be confused with AI agents, but the software that that endpoint agents, right? That is a net data creator. So we're creating 7 trillion or so events like a day. And if you're constantly creating this new data stream, that is going to give you an advantage because what's the lifeblood of any AI system? is the data that you feed into it. So I think you know for us it's always like well what are our modes? How do we look at it? How do we make sure that you know we we disrupted the incumbents we disrupted the semantics the McAfei you know all those other players are like all gone for the most part or changed or bought or whatever and you never want to be in a position where somebody you know disrupts you. So we're always like how do we disrupt ourselves? How do we do things differently? How do we think differently? But at the end of the day, you know, if my my main focus, and I tell this to our team all the time, if we take care of the customer, the rest takes care of itself. What the customer wants is they want to be protected. They want to have trust in their in their vendor and their partner. And at the end of the day, they want to make it super economical. Like, no one wants to spend unnecessary money. So give them the best outcome at the best cost and in an experience that doesn't take you know seven consoles and six chairs to run around and and just make it easy. And that's the number one thing you know that our customers always tell me is like it is so easy to deploy your stuff just work I had a meeting this morning and it was like you know what we're there's two companies merging together they're going to go with us. Um the other company didn't have us and it was like your stuff just is so easy to deploy and I think that's a big one is time to value. So a lot of people right now are talking about job losses due to AI although that really hasn't happened. I think the opposite has happened in terms of net job creation so far and similarly there's a lot of questions what should my kids study and what will happen in the future for jobs and the like. What is your view on that or where would you recommend people go going forward or you know is this even a long-term issue? Well, just in general from an AI perspective, and if you look at the the technology changes um that have taken place over the last couple hundred years, like each major shift has created more opportunity and more jobs. They're different, but there were more of them. And I firmly believe that's going to be the case here. And you know, when you look at whether it's programming, you're still going to need people to manage the agents. You're still going to need people to think about these architectures. It's not just fire and forget. I know a lot of people would like to say that, but there is human creativity that you're going to need. I think specific to cyber security, this is one of the areas that that I always talk to to young folks about people in uh in university is it's a great field to be in. If you understand AI, if you understand security, it it's an everchanging field. It and it's it's actually not a solvable problem. I think every vendor would like to say they solve the problem. It's not solvable. And you you've got to mitigate the risk. You've got to come up with the best solutions. You've got to be able to protect the customers. And you know, there's a lot of things that go into it, but it's always evolving. There's going to be technology in five years that we haven't even thought about today. And if you're in university, you're going to be some of the people that are going to be thinking about how you protect it. So, I always, you know, try to give back and think about the what college kids are doing or I get asked all the time from parents, what should what should my kids study? I think cyber security and technology and AI is a fantastic field. It's a great note to end on. Thanks so much for doing this, George. >> Thanks for joining us. >> Oh, you're quite welcome. Thank you so much. >> Find us on Twitter at [music] No Prior Pod. Subscribe to our YouTube channel if you want to see our faces. Follow the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen. That way, you get a new episode every week. [music] And sign up for emails or find transcripts for every episode at no-bers.com.