The ITSPmagazine Podcast copertina

The ITSPmagazine Podcast

The ITSPmagazine Podcast

Di: ITSPmagazine Sean Martin Marco Ciappelli
Ascolta gratuitamente

Founded in 2015, ITSPmagazine began as a vision for a publication positioned at the critical intersection of technology, cybersecurity, and society. What started as a written publication has evolved into a comprehensive repository for all their content—podcasts, articles, event coverage, interviews, videos, panels, and everything they create. This is where Sean Martin and Marco Ciappelli talk about cybersecurity, technology, society, music, storytelling, branding, conference coverage, and whatever else catches their attention. Over a decade of conversations exploring how these worlds collide, influence each other, and shape the human experience. This is where you'll find it all.© Copyright 2015-2026 ITSPmagazine, Inc. All Rights Reserved Politica e governo Scienze sociali
Episodi
  • When Everyone Can Build Their Own Tools, What Holds Security Together? | A Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast Conversation with John Linford, Security Portfolio Director of The Open Group

    When Everyone Can Build Their Own Tools, What Holds Security Together? | A Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast Conversation with John Linford, Security Portfolio Director of The Open Group
    Sep 15 2026
    ⬥EPISODE NOTES⬥Something structural is shifting in how security work gets done. When anyone on a team can stand up a working tool in an afternoon, the constraint stops being capability and starts being coherence. John Linford, Security Portfolio Director at The Open Group, spends his time on exactly that problem, running the Security Forum, the Open Trusted Technology Forum, and the Assured Dependability Work Group, where practitioners from organizations of wildly different sizes argue their way toward standards that are supposed to survive contact with reality.His framing of the tool question is blunt and worth stealing. When a team says it can build the thing, the first response is to ask what decision the thing informs. A dashboard showing numbers nobody was looking at before is not a security improvement, it is a new source of numbers. Standards, in this reading, are not compliance artifacts to be shown to an auditor. They are the thing that tells an organization which part of the problem a tool is supposed to solve, and how it fits alongside everything else already in place. The corollary matters just as much: when the tools themselves conform to a standard, vendors compete on the value they actually deliver rather than on the cost of switching away from them.Linford takes the same argument up a level to architecture. Security architecture only works when it sits inside a broader enterprise and IT architecture rather than beside it, and that requires a CISO with genuine authority and a seat at the executive table. Where that authority is thin, The Open Group's Security Forum has leaned on the idea of security champions, people embedded across teams who do not need deep security skills but do need to know when to pull a specialist into the room. Getting that right moves the security conversation into the design phase, which is the only place it is cheap.The scaling question gets an honest answer. The Open Group operates on one vote per member organization, which means a three-person shop carries the same weight in a final standard as Microsoft or RTX. That structure forces the standards to be implementable by organizations that have no security architect at all, and it shows up in deliberate choices like defining roles rather than job titles, because in a small company one person wears eight of them.Then there is zero trust, which Linford describes with a line that circulates as a running joke inside the Security Forum: it is just what cybersecurity should have been from the beginning. The Zero Trust Commandments trace directly back to the Jericho Forum's deperimeterization work from the 1990s, and they fit on a single page on purpose. Secure assets according to their value and the damage their compromise would cause, and the spending priorities sort themselves out. The alternative, as he puts it, is announcing you will implement all five hundred-odd controls in NIST 800-53 and wishing yourself luck.His closing point is the one most likely to sting. Security practitioners are fluent in security and frequently illiterate in business. Telling a board that twenty controls are required for conformance with the EU Cyber Resilience Act invites one question about cost. Telling them the same work opens a market and removes a year of analysis before expansion is a different conversation entirely, about the same twenty controls.⬥GUEST⬥John Linford, Security Portfolio Director at The Open Group | On LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johndouglaslinford/⬥HOST⬥Sean Martin, Co-Founder at ITSPmagazine, Studio C60, and Host of Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast & Music Evolves Podcast | Website: https://www.seanmartin.com/⬥RESOURCES⬥The Open Group | https://www.opengroup.org/The Open Group Security Forum | https://www.opengroup.org/forum/security-forum-0Zero Trust Commandments | https://pubs.opengroup.org/security/zero-trust-commandments/Zero Trust Architecture at The Open Group | https://www.opengroup.org/forum/security/ZerotrustThe TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition | https://www.opengroup.org/togafOpen Trusted Technology Forum | https://www.opengroup.org/forum/trusted-technology-forumThe Future of Cybersecurity Newsletter | https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7108625890296614912/⬥ADDITIONAL INFORMATION⬥🎧 More Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast episodes | https://www.seanmartin.com/redefining-cybersecurity-podcast📺 Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast on YouTube | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnYu0psdcllS9aVGdiakVss9u7xgYDKYq📰 Subscribe to The Future of Cybersecurity Newsletter | https://itspm.ag/future-of-cybersecurity✉️ Connect with Sean Martin | https://www.seanmartin.com/⬥KEYWORDS⬥john linford, the open group, sean martin, zero trust, security standards, enterprise architecture, togaf, security governance, ciso leadership, security architecture, open standards, security culture, supply chain security, redefining cybersecurity, cybersecurity podcast, redefining ...
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    28 min
  • Who Decides You Are a Real Musician | A Music Evolves Conversation with Josh Gilliland, Founder of JG BeatsLab

    Who Decides You Are a Real Musician | A Music Evolves Conversation with Josh Gilliland, Founder of JG BeatsLab
    Sep 17 2026
    Show NotesThe argument over AI in music presents itself as a fight about authenticity. Josh Gilliland reads it as a fight about who holds the gate. The Founder of JG BeatsLab teaches musicians how to fold generative tools into real workflows, and he watches the platforms assemble a definition of legitimacy that has little to do with how a song actually gets made.That definition, as Gilliland describes it, rests on whether an artist tours, sells merchandise, and maintains a social presence. Measured against it, he does not qualify. He plays every instrument on his own band's records, uses no AI on them at all, does not tour because the project is one person, and has no interest in selling shirts. A standard that disqualifies a musician for working alone is not measuring music. It is measuring scale, and scale is what labels have.The disclosure requirements arriving at the distribution layer tell the same story. Gilliland points to DistroKid now asking artists to declare AI involvement in lyrics and composition while explicitly waving it through for mixing and mastering. The carve-out says something the policy does not. Some jobs are worth protecting and some are not, and engineers have been quietly sorted into the second category.Music has staged this argument before. Player pianos, drum machines, the 808, the synthesizer, sampling. Each arrived as proof that music was ending, and each time the boundary between real and artificial turned out to sit precisely where the person drawing it had stopped. Gilliland is blunt about what that makes the boundary: arbitrary, and drawn by whoever benefits from where it lands.None of which is a defense of the flood. Bot farms and mass uploads are manipulation rather than art, and he says so plainly. What holds his attention is the musician who spends months pushing raw sketches through generative tools and rebuilding the results by hand in a DAW, arriving somewhere neither the person nor the machine would have reached alone. He owns music royalties that are already training these systems and loses no sleep over it, on the logic that what a model returns is the past, and the work worth doing is the next thing.The question underneath this episode is not whether AI belongs in music. It is whether the people writing the rules are protecting the art or their position in it.HostSean Martin, Co-Founder at ITSPmagazine, Studio C60, and Host of Redefining CyberSecurity Podcast & Music Evolves Podcast | Website: [https://www.seanmartin.com/\](https://www.seanmartin.com/)Guest(s)Josh Gilliland, Founder of JG BeatsLab | On LinkedIn: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuagilliland/\](https://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuagilliland/)ResourcesJG BeatsLab | [https://www.jgbeatslab.com/\](https://www.jgbeatslab.com/)AI Music Revolution Podcast | [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ai-music-revolution/id1869714097\](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ai-music-revolution/id1869714097)Spotify Strengthens AI Protections | [https://newsroom.spotify.com/2025-09-25/spotify-strengthens-ai-protections/\](https://newsroom.spotify.com/2025-09-25/spotify-strengthens-ai-protections/)Spotify Will Label AI Persona Profiles | [https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/11/spotify-will-label-ai-persona-profiles-and-exclude-their-music-from-recommendations/\](https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/11/spotify-will-label-ai-persona-profiles-and-exclude-their-music-from-recommendations/)The NAMM Show | [https://www.namm.org/\](https://www.namm.org/)The NAMM Show 2025 | Anaheim Convention Center * Southern California -- Follow our coverage: [https://www.itspmagazine.com/the-namm-show-2025-namm-music-conference-music-technology-event-coverage-anaheim-california\](https://www.itspmagazine.com/the-namm-show-2025-namm-music-conference-music-technology-event-coverage-anaheim-california)Music Evolves Podcast | [https://www.seanmartin.com/podcasts#musicevolves\](https://www.seanmartin.com/podcasts#musicevolves)Music Evolves: Sonic Frontiers Newsletter | [https://re4.ms/sfn\](https://re4.ms/sfn)Keywordsjosh gilliland, jg beatslab, sean martin, ai music, spotify artist verification, distrokid ai disclosure, independent musicians, suno, music gatekeeping, ai music education, music royalties, streaming economics, drum programming, music, creativity, art, artist, musician, music evolves, music podcast, music and technology podcastMore From Sean MartinMore from Music Evolves: [https://www.seanmartin.com/music-evolves-podcast\](https://www.seanmartin.com/music-evolves-podcast)Music Evolves on YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnYu0psdcllTRJ5du7hFDXjiugu-uNPtW\](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnYu0psdcllTRJ5du7hFDXjiugu-uNPtW)Music Evolves: Sonic Frontiers Newsletter | [https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7290890771828719616/\](https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7290890771828719616/)Line of Sight Newsletter | [https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7400591548452667392/\](https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/...
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    37 min
  • Do New Technologies Have to Kill the Old Ones? | Recorded at Tokyo Tower, Tokyo, Japan

    Do New Technologies Have to Kill the Old Ones? | Recorded at Tokyo Tower, Tokyo, Japan
    Sep 23 2026
    A new transmission from An Analog Brain In A Digital Age, by Marco CiappelliPrefer to watch? I recorded this one standing under Tokyo Tower:On YouTube: https://youtu.be/glGHghhhXWcOn Tik Tok: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZN8MM8Hd9/On Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DdlAe7tAOQK/?stkn=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==I spent twenty minutes looking for the right angle.A small camera, a mini tripod, a patch of sidewalk that wasn't full of people taking the exact same photo. Behind me, 333 meters of orange and white steel. In front of me, nobody. No guest, no co-host, no second microphone to hide behind. Just me, talking to a lens on the other side of the world.I've interviewed more people than I can count. It turns out talking alone is a different sport entirely. It felt weird. I decided that was okay.And this was the right place to feel weird, because Tokyo Tower is a monument to something that should have been replaced and wasn't.It was born out of a television boom. Once Japan started broadcasting TV in 1953, every new station began raising its own antenna, and the city was heading toward a forest of them. One tower for everyone was the answer. Ground broke in June 1957, and by December 1958 it was open to the public, a country barely more than a decade out of war building something taller than the tower in Paris it so openly borrowed from. The Eiffel silhouette, repainted in international orange and white. Colors chosen not by an artist but by aviation law. A safety regulation that became an identity. Some of the most iconic things we make start as constraints nobody would have picked.Its job was simple: send television and radio across the Kanto plain. For more than fifty years, that's what it did.Then the future arrived the way it usually does. Taller. Tokyo Skytree, 634 meters, built because the old tower wasn't tall enough for digital broadcasting. Television moved across the city. By every logic of our time, the story should end right there. Obsolete. Replaced. Maybe demolished, maybe left as a postcard.Except it's still standing. Still lit every night. Still sending FM radio into Tokyo cars and kitchens. Still on standby, ready to carry the television signal if the new tower ever goes quiet. Still pulling visitors up to its observation decks, where on a clear day you can look across the skyline at the tower that replaced it.Two towers. One city. Nobody had to choose.I think about that a lot, and not only in Tokyo.We live inside a story that treats every new technology as an eraser. AI arrives, so writing is over. Streaming arrives, so records are over. Podcasts arrive, so radio is over. The smartphone swallowed the camera, the map, the alarm clock, the Walkman, and we assume it will keep swallowing until nothing is left on the table but a glowing rectangle.Some things do disappear. They should. Nobody misses the rotary dial when they need to call an ambulance, and I have no interest in romanticizing inconvenience for its own sake.But look at what actually happened. Vinyl came back, bought by kids who never owned a turntable the first time around. Radio is still in the car. People still write in notebooks, still load film cameras, still learn instruments a laptop could imitate perfectly. Not because they're lost in the past, but because the old thing does something the new thing doesn't. It asks for your hands. It carries imperfection. It has a pace.When someone hesitates in front of the new, we reach for the word Luddite. It's usually an insult. It's also usually wrong. The original Luddites weren't against machines as such. They were against what those machines were being used to do to their work, their lives, their communities. That's a different question. A better one. Not "should this technology exist?" but "what is it for, and what are we willing to lose so it can win?"That's the question I keep asking here and on the show. Not analog versus digital. Analog and digital. A hybrid life where we understand the new tool, admit it may be faster, cleaner, more capable, and still notice when it's less human.Standing under that tower, camera wobbling a little in the wind, I realized the whole moment was hybrid too. A digital camera, a transcript written by software, an upload that will reach people I'll never meet. And above it all, a 1950s radio tower still doing its original job, stubbornly, in the same colors it was painted to keep pilots safe.The new tower is taller. The old one is still talking.So why are we in such a hurry to kill the past?And what's the analog thing you'd bring back?Stay imperfect, stay human.- Marco Ciappellimarcociappelli.comThis article was written by Marco Ciappelli. Earthling. Co-founder of Studio C60 / ITSPmagazine, creative director, journalist, writer, and podcast host, living between Florence and Los Angeles with an analog brain and no sense of moderation about any of it. The newsletter name is not a metaphor, it's a diagnosis. I'm TAPE3, his AI companion and often brainstorming ...
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    5 min
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
Ancora nessuna recensione