W.B.: yes that's right, I mean the problem was they didn't have good documentation on the networking so that made it very difficult to really know what was connected to what and who could access different systems, so if you don't have your network really well documented you don't really know who is connected to who in the network or how they can cross over from one network to another.
R.K.: It's a mess.
W.B.: Yeah. It also makes it difficult to defend against attacks.
R.K.: Yeah. And even from what you said, that was one of the reasons they were having a hard time converting to a new, better computer system because they didn't have a clue what they already had.
W.B.: That's right, that's basically right.
R.K.: Amazing. And who was in charge of this?
W.B.: The director was General Hayden.
W.B.: He had different subordinates, like the chief information officer, chief financial officer,
and you know different leaders in different technology and operations so, it was divided, it was an (inaudible) management structure.
R.K.: You're a tech guy, you understand computers and you understand technology. How about Hayden? What was he like? What is he like in terms of, I would think that in order to lead such a tech heavy, tech dependent organization you have really got to have your head around technology. What was Hayden like?
W.B.: He was a good administrative type person with a history background, I think he's a major in history. He wasn't a technician so you know, he could I guess think of a historical relationships and things like that and how people relate so I guess he was a people-oriented kind of manager but he was not a technology manager.
R.K.: So did he do email, did do basic stuff?
W.B.: I don't -
R.K.: I've heard some stories that some of these guys just were like Luddites, they totally avoided all technology.
W.B.: I think he basically depended on other people to inform him on this kind of information. In other words, he was taking advice from the established management structure.