This Week in Barrons –
5-21-2017:
This Jean-Michel Basquiat
painting set a new Sotheby’s record of $110.5m.
WannaCry – the Test
This week WannaCry cured cancer AND found
the missing dryer sock by architecting a ransomware attack that quickly became
the worst digital disaster to strike the open Internet in years. It crippled global ATMs, transportation, and
even hospitals. However, it lacked the
follow-through of a ‘Live Free or Die Hard’ remake, and more resembled a
cybercrime with mistakes at practically every turn. WannaCry spread with a speed and scale that
has never previously been achieved. It
used a recently ‘leaked’ NSA Windows vulnerability (called EternalBlue), and
set loose the worst epidemic of malicious encryption ever seen. But despite infecting more than 200,000
systems across 150 countries, WannaCry’s ‘finishing move’ limited its scope and
profitability.
As a bit of background, ransomware was a
concept originally outlined in an NSA
e-mail that detailed:
-
The exact
methodology on how to create a Malware that would encrypt a user’s hard drive,
-
Then deliver a
message to the infected user asking for ransom in exchange for a decryption
key,
-
Use one of
several cryptocurrencies to accept the ransom payment,
-
And finally,
deliver the digital decryption key back to the user – allowing them access to
their old (unharmed) dataset.
WannaCry’s integration of the NSA / Windows
exploit into a virus was pure genius; however, their questionable
‘finishing-move’ decisions included:
-
Building in a
web-based ‘kill-switch’ that shortened the spread of the Malware,
-
Handling bitcoin
payments in an unsophisticated fashion that allowed for far easier
back-tracing,
-
And using a
ransom payment function that made it virtually impossible to automatically know
who paid the ransom and who didn’t.
A genius attack of this magnitude (that
involved so many sophomoric missteps) begs the question: If the cybercriminals
had actually gotten the ‘easy parts’ correct – could the results have crippled
the world? As Craig Williams (a
cybersecurity researcher with Cisco’s Talos team) stated: “WannaCry was a high
damage, high publicity, and high law-enforcement visibility crime – with one of
the lowest profit margins we’ve seen from any ransomware campaign. This will attract copycats, and the next set
of criminals will be far more skilled at fueling the spread of their epidemic
and profiting from it.”
WannaCry’s reach caused so much damage that
it’s goal may not have been profitability at all. Instead, what if it was a group trying to
embarrass the NSA by wreaking havoc with its own ‘leaked’ hacking tools. What if this was just a warning shot – a shot
across the bow? Sure, in China, the ATMs
went dark. In Britain, hospitals went
down, clinics closed, and surgeries were postponed. But several elements just don’t add up: (a) First, the criminals attacked Windows XP – an old operating system,
released in August of 2001, that Microsoft had stopped supporting in April
of 2014. So, the attack was not on
the newest or even on the most widely used equipment. (b) Second, payment was demanded in bitcoin. Bitcoin is a
widely-known cryptocurrency (that without some really high end forensic
technology sleuthing) masks who is sending or receiving payments. Do you think the CIA, FBI, and 17 other
intelligence agencies like the idea of someone being able to be paid
without their knowledge?
But what if this widespread cyberattack on
an outdated computer operating system demanding bitcoin as payment – wasn’t
just some kid’s idea? What if it was a
‘trial balloon’ floated by the ‘major players’.
I find it too coincidental that following an amazingly blistering run in
bitcoin (going from $1,400 to over $2,000 in under 2 weeks), a worldwide ransomware
attack goes out demanding bitcoin for payment. I can see the
headlines already: “Bitcoin has to be reined in, because the ‘bad guys’ use it
for drugs, firearms, and ransomware.” The press will attack bitcoin for
its global ubiquitous footprint, and expose the vulnerability of older technology
– further forcing companies to upgrade and buy new.
Don’t shoot the messenger here, but Edward
Snowden forewarned us. He told us about
manufacturers inserting ‘kill switches’ in virtually all the hardware and
software we buy. He talked of dams,
trains, airports, cell towers, power stations, electrical grids, and banks
coming to a halt. He specifically talked
of how the NSA had created a back door into Windows XP that could be exploited. Guess what, if TV’s can spy on people and
send information back to Samsung – don’t you think that every router, cable
modem, and control box come with manufactured ‘back doors’? What if your next Microsoft ‘Updating’
message displayed ‘Disabled Forever’ instead.
WannaCry was just a test that we failed miserably. It was a demonstration of how quickly and
pervasively a cyber-attack could cripple our entire civilization. I would ask everyone to arrive at a
‘back-up-plan’ of survival without power, running water and grocery
stores. My yardstick in the cybercrime
war is: As long as the cybercriminal is paid ten-thousand times more than the
cyber-policeman, I know who’s going to win this war.
The Market:
On Wednesday of last week, the market lost
almost 400 DOW points, and over 40 S&P points. The excuse for the fall was that Trump was
soon to be impeached over asking Comey to drop the Michael Flynn / Russia
investigation. It was a high-volume
sell-off that plunged the S&P, the DOW, the Russell Small Cap Index, the
Transports, and the Financials well below their respective 50-day moving
averages. But we’ve seen these 1-day wonders before. If the market can jump for 300 points on
March 1 and spend the next 2 months drifting sideways and lower – doesn’t it
stand to reason that it could fall 300+ points and spend the next month inching
back higher?
For months, our market has ignored the
issues with North Korea, Syria, falling auto sales, fading GDP, and a hundred
other things – and continues to hit all-time highs. Now, because the Democrats and the media are
fixated on a note that the previous FBI director wrote – THAT is the reason
that the market is pulling back? This
week alone we saw: (a) the N.Y. Empire State report, which was supposed to be
Positive 7 – come in at Negative 1, with new orders crashing, (b) North Korea
launch yet another missile, and (c) Chinese manufacturing and retail data badly
miss estimates to the downside.
On Thursday, the market ramped up for a
110-point bounce, and on Friday the market shook off any remaining doubts and
put in a 141 point up-day – retaking its 50-day moving averages on both the DOW
and the S&P. It would be simple to
say that we’re going to march right back up and challenge the all-time highs,
but I don’t think it’s really that easy.
First, the real power for the push higher on Friday came from one of our
very own FED heads – James Bullard.
Headlines like these kept hitting the wires: (a) “FED's Bullard questions need for June rate
hike”, and (b) “FED’s Bullard wants to retain the option to do QE in the
future if needed.” Obviously, the market
loved hearing that a June rate hike might be put on hold, and the additional QE
was just icing on the cake.
The IWM (Russell ETF) and the XLF (ETF for
the financial sector) remain below their 50-day moving averages. The DOW, S&P, and the NASDAQ all remain
below where they opened on Wednesday of last week. Put all of this together and I think that we
might stall out, and see a bit of sideways action in the near future. It's obvious that the Central Banksters are
not ready to let this market roll-over and correct, but on the other hand I
don't think they have the firepower to make it to new highs either. So, I’m looking for yet another bout of
choppy sideways action for this next week.
Tips:
First and foremost, often a person’s home
contributes to being one of their largest investments. SF contributed the following chart showing
the location, the median home price, and income requirement (assuming a 10%
down payment, associated monthly costs, a 4% mortgage on a 30-year fixed rate
loan, and a maximum debt-to-income ratio of 45%). If you wish to own a home, you may want to
synch-up your income potential along with location in order to help make your
dream a reality.
As you look at the following chart of
technology players, evaluate which will outperform as: (a) Concerns over
President Trump continue to dominate the headlines, (b) Bets on a FED rate hike
continue to recede, (c) Declines in the U.S. Dollar continue to strengthen both
gold and oil, and (d) Shifting into a global risk-off mode continues to be the
norm and not the exception to the rule.
Also in terms of ‘vulnerability’, view these same 5 tech companies along
the lines of what vertical niches do they monopolize. For example: Google (Alphabet) controls
‘search’, Amazon controls ‘retail’, Facebook controls ‘advertising’, Microsoft
controls the ‘operating system’ – what does Apple control again?
SPX – For every single week in 2017, the
S&P Index (SPX) has ended the week within it’s expected move. The
expected move for next Friday, May 26th includes a lower end of
2354 to an upper end of 2410. Therefore,
selling an Iron Condor surrounding those strikes would be the appropriate move.
Finally, traders seem to be looking at the
probability of President Trump either (a) being impeached, or (b) not serving a
full term. In terms of options, the
market at this point is a bet on Trump vs Washington, DC. If you are a
contrarian on the Washington news cycle and are bullish/neutral on Trump and
the QQQs, then the ‘jade lizard’ that is: (a) Short the $132 Put, (b) Short the
$139 Call, and (c) Long the $140 Call for the June monthly expiration has a 65%
probability of making 50% of its max profit before expiring – all the while
generating $3.80 in daily positive theta.
To follow me on Twitter.com
and on StockTwits.com to get my daily thoughts and trades – my handle is:
taylorpamm.
Please be safe out there!
Disclaimer:
Expressed thoughts proffered
within the BARRONS REPORT, a Private and free weekly economic newsletter, are
those of noted entrepreneur, professor and author, R.F. Culbertson,
contributing sources and those he interviews. You can learn more and
get your free subscription by visiting:
Please write to Mr.
Culbertson at: <rfc@culbertsons.com>
to inform him of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be
reproduced. You may use in complete form or, if quoting in brief, reference
<http://rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com/>.
If you'd like to view RF's
actual stock trades - and see more of his thoughts - please feel free to sign
up as a Twitter follower - "taylorpamm" is the handle.
If you'd like to see RF in
action - teaching people about investing - please feel free to view the TED
talk that he gave on Fearless Investing:
Creativity = https://youtu.be/n2QiPSe_dKk
Investing = https://youtu.be/zIIlk6DlSOM
Marketing = https://youtu.be/p0wWGdOfYXI
Sales = https://youtu.be/blKw0zb6SZk
Startup Incinerator = https://youtu.be/ieR6vzCFldI
To unsubscribe please refer
to the bottom of the email.
Views expressed are provided
for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an
offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and is not in any way a
testimony of, or associated with Mr. Culbertson's other firms or
associations. Mr. Culbertson and related parties are not registered
and licensed brokers. This message may contain information that is
confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity
named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any
alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied
by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is
not indicative of future performance. Please make sure to review important
disclosures at the end of each article.
Note: Joining BARRONS REPORT
is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of RF
Culbertson and Associates.
PAST RESULTS ARE NOT
INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE
INVESTMENTS (INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS) AN INVESTOR SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS
INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT
PRACTICES MAY INCREASE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS; MAY NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY
CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE
INVESTMENT MANAGER.
Alternative investment
performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a substantial amount
of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund and account
managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts; the use of
a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could mean lack of
diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no secondary
market for an investor's interest in alternative investments, and none is
expected to develop.
All material presented
herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to its accuracy.
Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior notice. Culbertson
and/or the staff may or may not have investments in any funds cited above.
Remember the Blog: <http://rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com/>
Until next week – be safe.
R.F. Culbertson
