How a small tech business can use SEO to get new customers

Nobody in tech wants to be "marketed" to. They have certain interests, and if your website has valuable content, they'll search for it and find it.

Now, there are "SEO experts" who have no subject matter knowledge or interest in your topic. Useful people for sure, but it's not enough.

You need to think about what people/ prospects will google (or other search options). What words will they type into search bar? Those are your target words to create compelling content about.

From there it's a matter of delivering excellent content that will attract them to your website. Once they're on your website, you've become a trusted advisor. Plus, you may get leads for sales from their visit. Offer a free trial on your blog site or web site. If they are interested, they'll come to you.

Web pages and blog sites get search engine top billing by offering meaty, useful content that others link to as authoritative. My thoughts in a nutshell from over 6 years running a corp blog in infosec:

- Know your audience. What search words are important to your company?

- Provide no BS good content. Useful information for practitioners who might be inclined to buy your product.

- Details: About 1000 words of content, with links to fellow authoritative sites. With your defined keywords, carefully target each article with a clear H1 with the topic words. Have H2s supporting the topic. I can't summarize 6 years of experience easily, but I did a talk at DerbyCon on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4iH3Ta1DDs

Either you're on page 1 of search results, or prospects won't find you. Also you can't BS search engines. Either you pay for ads, or your content is so good, they come to you of their own volition.

I'll write more later, but I felt like sharing my learnings.

Jury deliberations in sexual assault trial

The subtle bits

A fellow female juror suggested she should be jury fore-person. She positioned herself at end of table and had a very nice outfit on. I commented as such and she remarked, it's my best. She brought peanut M&Ms to share with fellow jurors. We agreed as to her being fore-person.

The initial vote

At approximately noon 12/4, after 12/2 being jury selection and 12/3 being evidence and testimony, and after closing arguments by attorneys for prosecution, defense and prosecution again, after about 20 minutes of discussion, first vote in jury was 9-3 not guilty - guilty. The three jurors voting guilty were the fore-person a female, and male seated to her right, as well as a female juror to her left. 

The judge's charges, a court record of what we were to determine / judge upon, are called into dispute a number of times

Here's where it gets weird. A number of fellow jurors seemed upset at the Texas law definition of "sexual assault" in the judge's charge to the jury - they were apparently disturbed that physical assault was a requirement to the sexual assault charge being valid. They remarked "it shouldn't be".

Weird, we had to send multiple communications to the judge from jury about what "beyond a reasonable doubt" meant. They wanted it to be what they thought happened in their judgement of  likelihood.

Meanwhile 3 fellow jurors move to guilty vote. Maybe they wanted to get out of the jury room in Austin on a beautiful day. We had to eat Jimmy John's subs for lunch. Hours go on.

Racism

I was so confused by fellow jurors saying illogical things, I finally had to ask: "is this about a black male accused and a white female accuser/victim". There was so much reasonable doubt to me, as a juror - I was confused. They were all "oh no, not at all."

The reasonable doubt was evident to me

Hung jury 6-6.

Jury duty in a sexual assault case in Austin - capturing testimony and evidence

There will be a part 2 of this blog as the jury deliberations were an entirely different thing than actual testimony and evidence.

Part 2 will describe jury deliberations, which I will never forget :) I asked the Honorable Judge Perkins of the Austin Blackwell-Thurman Criminal Justice Center for permission to blog on my experiences on the jury and he indicated there was no problem with blogging on a trial after it had come to a close.

Had jury duty this week in Austin. It was a case of felony sexual assault - Lewis Hall as the defendent and Jean Grey (psuedonym) accuser / victim. As I learned later after being selected for jury duty.

I was not permitted to google either, after jury selection was made (~1pm 12/2) and I was sworn in as a juror. I respect our US criminal justice system and felt strongly I should do my civic duty to the best of my ability. As a person fond of OSINT to learn more, it was quite painful.

Have to admit, when I first set eyes on defendent, I kind of thought he was probably guilty for the State to take 2 years to do all the steps to prosecute Hall. Initial thought on defendant - Hall appeared sad to me, which could mean guilt. He had 2 attorneys, one of them Dan Wannamaker - likely expensive.

The evidence - trial begins 12/3/19

Opening arguments... no data, just lawyers talking. Fluff.

First witness, Jean Grey. 

Grey was stoic, clear no tears, detailed and credible testimony. Grey met Hall New Year's eve 2017 in NYC. When Grey moved to Austin she reconnected with Hall. The hung out platonically prior to the event in question. In testimony Grey described Hall as "mean", citing he had left her downtown while hanging out, and she doesn't drive.

On the day of the event, 9/9/17, Grey went to a UT football game with Hall's roommate Hon Lam (spelling?), and 2 other male friends of Hon's, one of them Daniel. Hon is Hall's roommate. After the game, Grey, Hon and Daniel apparently went to Trudy's and ate food. At some time thereafter they went to Daniel's apartment to chill before going out - Rainey Street was mentioned in testimony as their later plans.

Hall and two other men arrived at Daniel's apartment some time later. There was testimony that alcoholic shots were done.

Hon and his male friends leave at some time after that.

At some subsequent time, Hall invited Grey into the bedroom. According to Grey's testimony, she presumed it was for the purpose of Hall apologizing to Grey for mean previous behavior.

In the bedroom, Grey testified she sat on a corner of the bed. Her testimony becomes unclear to me at this point. Grey clearly states Hall said "I'm going to have sex with you". Then Grey said she kissed Hall back. The timeline is unclear as to when the kissing back occurred. Subsequent testimony by Grey was Hall forced Grey down on the bed and at the same time undressed himself, unwrapped and put a condom on his penis, while holding her down.

They had sex - prosecutor and defense attorney agree on that, although the former termed it rape, as did Grey. Grey in testimony indicated she felt smothered, hurt - and wanted to escape. This event was at approximately 9pm on 9/9/17 according to the patrol officer's report later.

Grey testified she found the sex  painful and said so to Hall. Hall agreed to reposition so that Grey was on top in the intercourse.

Grey, after some time of being on top (we don't know - many jurors were uncomfortable with the timeline according to evidence presented). Testimony by Grey indicates Hall did not ejaculate. Hall permitted Grey to leave the bedroom.

Hall and Grey exit the bedroom of Daniel's apartment,to find they were alone in Daniel's apartment.

Instead of calling an Uber, Grey chose to go back to Hall's apartment, 2 doors down, citing the neighborhood as too dangerous to wait for the Uber..

Grey testified Hall threw her phone, but later willingly gave the phone back to her. The timeline on when this occurred is unclear.

Hall and Grey spent approximately 45 minutes at Hall's apartment after these event described as traumatic sexual assault by Grey's testimony.

Grey testified Hall attempted to penetrate her via a finger during this timeframe at Hall's apartment.

Unclear timeline, but it appears Grey, reunited with her phone, began a long text thread presented in evidence with her best friend Myra. First text to Myra: "I just had angry sex" with some emojis. Later Myra texts back, "how was it?" Grey texts back "Eh" The entire text string I cannot replicate by memory, and was not allowed to take evidence. But to me the gist was Grey was either processing a rape, or more likely, seeking the approval of her best friend Myra.

Bottom line: text string in evidence went from ~"sex was eh", and "hahaha" and other back and forth between Grey and Myra to a weird jump. Myra testified she had a phone conversation with Grey between the text string. Grey in her prior testimony denied any phone conversation.

Myra, with a previous sexual assault university course, indicated strongly that Grey needed to get a rape kit done.

Grey takes an Uber home sometime after 9:48 pm according to text evidence.

Myra keeps Grey on the phone for over an hour while Myra drives to Grey's house.

Myra and Grey go to a SAFE house in Austin  - approximately 11:30 pm arrival.

At SAFE house, Grey is interviewed by APD police officer Edwards and is examined by nurse Amanda B (forget last name), who both testified later in the trial.

5+ hours of time are spent by Grey and Myra at SAFE.

Testimony as to Grey's experience at SAFE is ambiguous. Amanda B, the nurse, indicated Grey was calm; numb. Testimony from Myra indicates screaming by Grey and intense pain. Amanda B testimony indicates Grey had discomfort only. Evidence presented at trial on Grey's detailed evaluation indicates very minor injuries. 

At ~5:30 AM 9/10/17 Grey and Myra go back to Grey's home. Myra stay's at Grey's home for a week, according to testimony.

Judge lets jurors go home after all testimony and evidence 12/3/19

What happened 12/4/19

Prosecutor made a first statement at the Judge's request.. Followed by defense attorney's close, followed by prosecutor's close. Prosecutor's key focus was "no-means-no and consent". Defense oddly didn't focus on reasonable doubt but rather portrayed Jean as a victim of Myra - pardon the paraphrasing - creating drama by introducing the concept that this was a rape, rather than a regrettable sexual encounter.

Jury deliberations

Here's where it gets weird. I'll finish the rest tomorrow night after work, but I know how memory works, and I really wanted to capture the evidence as I saw it. My account of deliberation prroceedings will be more subjective - my opinion. The information accounted above is my recollection of the information presented in evidence in court as a juror in this case 12/3/19, while it is fresh in my mind.

What Does It Take to Be Effective in InfoSec?

I've been kicking around in InfoSec since 1996. Once I met InfoSec, nothing else has held my passion as much. Yes this is a bit odd, but it is what it is, it is what I love. It is "good" versus "evil" - something fascinating to me. More on that later, as I delineate criminals from those seeking to help by finding vulns. For now, here's the point.

So I did a poll on Twitter, expecting maybe 50 votes, but instead I got over 2000 votes.

I've seen tweets saying if you don't write code, you're worthless (or will be soon) in InfoSec. Have seen pro-certification advocates, and those who disrespect certificate holders. The needing a degree to be effective in InfoSec and get a job has been hotly debated. Have seen tweets advocating doing bad acts as necessary to having street creds.

Looks like part of the answer is, your nature.. Effectiveness in contributing to InfoSec community takes wanting to help, humility, altruism, critical thinking, communication skills and curiosity.

Ability to not be lazy and Google what you need to know is key.

It's kind of like The Breakfast Club.

People who are effective in InfoSec might follow the classic movie's final essay turned in.

It takes all of our skills working together to defeat the true bad folks attacking the innocent. I could do a bunch of fancy words here, but this is my gist :)

Sears Failed: We're Not a "Stuff" Society Any More

Sears failed. They had great stuff, the best tools, they stood behind their products. Lots of theories about why they failed, but I have a hypothesis: we're just not that "into" stuff anymore.

In the late '70's I loved music, and would lug my huge speakers, turntable, receiver to college, to co-op job. Agonizing. Now - to enjoy music requires much less stuff. A smart phone and tiny speaker with great tech delivers most of what most people want.

In the late 1980's, personal computers were purchased in huge boxes, a bunch of them. Heavy, lots of packing materials, tons of documents and paper. Now - you buy a smartphone or laptop - the purchase can literally fit in one hand.

In the 1970's, 1980's and to a lesser degree the 1990's, stuff was expensive. It was desired. Then Chinese/overseas manufacturing cheapened stuff.

Grandmas bemoan sending gifts to youngsters and not getting formal thank you notes. The gifts they send are typically stuff. Why would a kid want stuff when now stuff is cheap and experiences, virtual entertainment and services are king. Grannies are working from a different perspective maybe.

People aren't needing those awesome Sears tools as much. Many people don't use them at all. They get online, find a pro, make a call, get the work done.

Clothes and TVs are cheap, cars are cheaper than they used to be. Appliances, furniture, all the stuff you need to live comfortably are relatively cheap.

Minimalists suggest going around your house and getting rid of any item that does not give you joy.

Don't get me wrong. Certain items are not considered "stuff" - really nice things, luxury items, are still in high demand. Apple products, very fine wine, craft beer, online entertainment/games, fun, trendy cooking items, fashionable clothes and fine accessories are very much in demand and command top dollar. We want things that make us feel like a million bucks.

We spend huge on vacations, experiences. Not unusual to spend $500 for a really good concert.

Hell, I've heard from people my age that their kids don't even want cars. Why? Use smart phone and get a Lyft. Safer too

Sears didn't carry such items. Sears carried stuff.

I Got Unfair Advantages in the '80s Entering High Tech as a Woman

Back in the '70's and '80s and '90s - women had it tough in tech. But, not as tough as now. Women in tech now, have it worse than I did back then.

In high school in the '70s, Catholic school, but I lucked out. My teacher in chemistry and physics was an amazing man, Mr. Lonnegan. He found it amusing when I whipped the guys on tests and experiments. I had male support. It made me bold.

Guidance counselor advised against Georgia Tech college choice. No surprise :( I chose Tech.

Then I got lucky again. had to work my way to pay for college - went into Co-op program. Found an advisor who placed me at Procter and Gamble with my roommate, figuring we could help each other out. I was so lucky. Damn that roommate and I stuck together, we would study late into the night - she was smarter than me and I did better than I would have studying alone.

Not saying P&G experience was perfect, but it surely hardened me, working in a union factory. Again, weirdly lucky with the women on manufacturing floor supporting me and my projects. When supervisor, Gordy, went out on vacation, we had the highest production rate in history, as I was allowed to be their supervisor in his absence and I think the women were tired of Gordy and thought it was fun to make me a hero.

Graduating Georgia Tech. I had 10 job offers. Before you think it was because I was a woman, yah, no, high honors, Co-op degree with great references. I really wanted the Alcoa job, but ex-husband wanted a PhD at North Carolina State. So I chose IBM in Raleigh.

Lucky again. Then again, back in my day, women in tech had it luckier than women now.

Tim Cook, yep that Tim Cook, was my office mate.

IBM in the early '80s treated women engineers well. I think they still do. When it came to training opps, my chain smoking anti-women manager had no choice but to give them to me. I learned CADAM, GPSS, other stuff I forget now - know this means nothing now, but at that time it was grand.

Yep, career went very well. Quit IBM 3 times, for startups, So lucky, so very lucky. In the late '90s being female in high tech was an advantage, not a disadvantage.

Long story short, I mentor young women entering tech now, I interact with men in tech on a regular basis nowadays and with exceptions, it is utterly depressing. Women are not welcomed. They are doubted, treated with disrespect.

Why though? Why? I would think by now we would be moving forward, not backward.

I had a lot of unfair advantages, but were they? Just a high school teacher who told me I was good at engineering. Just good treatment by employers. It is not too much to ask that young women in tech get this too.

I don't think they are getting the advantages I had way back then.

What to Do if Sexually Harrassed at Work

Do not go to HR. They are responsible for protecting the company, not you.

If you are physically attacked at work or an event, call law enforcement. Physical abuse is a crime, punishable by law. Dial 911.

If it's subtle innuendo, total crap-shoot. Unfortunately, you as a victim are going to need to be smarter. You go to HR - you will likely be labelled as a trouble-maker, and it's going to impact your career negatively.

So, what do you do? Debug the problem. Find out, why is the person doing this. Attempt to work with the perpetrator to remove misunderstandings.

Assuming the perpetrator of the abuse was truly intentionally malicious - ugh. So, step one, find someone in management who you trust, and present the problem to them. It is quite likely they can solve your problem.

If you have no such trusted person in management, consider leaving your position. It's easier to find a job when you still have one.

Depressing, unfair to you as a victim, yep! But it is what it is.