Book Review: This Is How They Tell Me the World Ends - Nicole Perlroth

This cybersecurity book is badly written, contains multiple offensive stereotypes, is technically inaccurate, and spends more time focussing on the author's love affair with the New York Times than almost anything else. Seriously, if you take a drink every time the book mentions the NYT, you'll spend most of the chapters drunk. Which, to be fair, is probably the best way to experience it.

The epilogue pre-emptively complains that "the technical community will argue I have over-generalized and over-simplicifed". I don't have a problem with that; it is essential to write about cybersecurity for the lay audience. But this book just gets things wrong. As a quick sample:

Some pushed to have his cybersecurity license stripped.

Does anyone know where I can get one of these fabled licenses?

Jobert would send discs flying out of Michiel’s hard drive from two hundred yards away.

If you can make a disc fly out of an HDD, something has gone very wrong!

It does become moderately interesting when the author stops gushing about the NYT and describes some of the implications behind the hacks which changed our world. The descriptions of Stuxnet, EternalBlue, and other cyberweapons are well done. But it quickly lapses back into lazy clichés.

For example, hackers are variously described thusly:

Every bar, at every conference, was reminiscent of the Mos Eisley cantina in Star Wars. Ponytailed hackers mingled with lawyers,

Their diet subsisted of sandwiches and Red Bull.

These young men, with their sunken, glowing eyes, lived through their screens.

hackers—pimply thirteen-year-olds in their parents’ basements, ponytailed coders from the web’s underbelly

Germans don’t do small talk, and they don’t do bullshit.

Then there's this:

To any woman who has ever complained about the ratio of females to males in tech, I say: try going to a hacking conference. With few exceptions, most hackers I met were men who showed very little interest in anything beyond code. And jiujitsu. Hackers love jiujitsu.

I don't even know where to start! Sure, the gender ratios are skewed, but every hacker I know has multiple interests and I don't think any of them include jiujitsu!

It's also sloppily edited. There are multiple odd typos and weird inconsistencies. For example:

Leonardo famously labeled himself with the Latin phrase senza lettere—without letters—because, unlike his Renaissance counterparts, he couldn’t read Latin.

He used the phrase "sanza lettere" - not "senza" - see Codex Atlanticus.

not the testosterone-fueled “boo-rah” soldier Hollywood had conditioned us to.

I can't find any reference to boo-rah outside of Hallowe'en articles.

Panetta told an audience on the USS Intrepid in New York. “They could derail passenger trains, or even more dangerous, derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals..

That's not what he said. The author has cribbed a incorrect transcription from - of course! - the New York Times.

Do passenger trains tend to carry lethal chemicals? No, obviously not. It took me less than 5 minutes to find the original video. At 1h 8m 22s, Panetta clearly says "derail trains loaded with". No "passenger".

Littered throughout attackers’ code were references to the 1965 science fiction epic Dune, a Frank Herbert science fiction novel set in a not-too-distant future

I'm not a big enough nerd to have read Dune. But most scholars agree it is set in the far future.

A century and a half earlier, in 1949, he reminded the crowd, a dozen countries had come together to agree on basic rules of warfare.

This book was written in 2020. While 1949 is a long time ago, it isn't a century ago. Perhaps this is a reference to the original 1864 convention?

I'll begrudgingly admit that the book does a good job of explaining some of the problems facing the world as cyber-warfare takes hold of industries and nations. But it is hidden behind so much American hegemony and basic mistakes that I found it borderline unreadable. On the rare occasions that the author stops unnecessarily inserting themself (and the New York Bloody Times) into the story, it can be rather interesting.

This is too important a story to be written up this badly.