John Jeremiah is most useful for accessible thought leadership on API security, security automation and security operations.
Best for
A security automation or API security vendor hosting a thought leadership webinar.
Not for
A named reviewer for head-to-head SOAR lab tests with raw benchmarks and guaranteed audience results.
Key takeaways
Slow automation is described as a security team's biggest vulnerability.
A 2025 report says 81% prioritize automation but only 6% have mature programs.
A SOC framework defines terms before describing how teams choose based on size, industry and risks.
Check first: Ask for job title, original analysis examples, and recent reach and engagement data.
Main ideas
Slow automation is the vulnerability, and time to automation is the metric to manage · Automation is framed as the answer to the security skills gap · Adoption is stuck between stated priority and real maturity
John Jeremiah shares cybersecurity material on LinkedIn, especially about API security, security automation and security operations.
The posts show a practical, introductory style: a SOC framework becomes a “blueprint” for setting priorities, while automation is framed as a way to reduce repetitive work and help teams respond faster.
They also share event and research announcements, including a Black Hat USA 2023 booth programme and a 2025 security-automation report.
Ask for a job title or examples of earlier work if those details matter to your campaign.
The clearest pattern is connecting security operations problems to accessible explanations and concrete hooks.
In one post, Jeremiah moves from understaffed teams and slow workflows to the idea of measuring “Time to Automation”; in another, the SOC-framework post defines the term before describing how teams might choose a framework based on their size, industry and risks.
The 2025 report post uses survey figures to show the gap between prioritizing automation and having mature programs.
Together, these examples offer an approachable entry point into automation and security operations.
The posts point to outside articles, a report and a panel rather than presenting those materials themselves.
Ask for examples of Jeremiah’s independent analysis of the linked claims if that matters to your campaign.
Across these posts, John Jeremiah's recurring argument is that security teams lose ground to slow, manual workflows rather than to a shortage of tools.
Read more
They press for speed: shrinking the time it takes to automate a response and treating that time as a metric worth managing.
Automation is presented mainly as relief for overstretched staff, while the practical side of the argument appears in framework-based operations and live demonstrations.
The strongest numbers and frameworks come from named colleagues and third-party research rather than from John Jeremiah's own analysis.
Ask for the evidence behind the claims if that matters to your decision.
Slow automation is the vulnerability, and time to automation is the metric to manage
John Jeremiah argues that understaffed security teams are overwhelmed while attackers keep accelerating, and that the problem is not a lack of automation tools but how long it takes to put them to work.
Read more
Traditional SOAR platforms get singled out because they demand coding and scripting before workflows run, which keeps response slow.
The proposed alternative is to measure Time to Automation and use AI-driven workflows to collapse that time.
The specific numbers come from a linked blog by Traceable co-founder and chief executive Gil Barak, not from the post itself: an expected cybersecurity talent gap of 85 million workers by 2030, and a claim that faster automation cuts response times by 99.999%.
The post lists three points from Gil Barak's blog — outdated automation opening security gaps instead of closing them, AI-driven workflows shrinking response times from months to seconds, and the need to track Time to Automation to stay ahead of evolving threats — and links to the blog for the full argument.
Read alongside the 2023 Black Hat post, which sells API security, Zero Trust and fraud talks rather than automation speed, the 2025 posts show a shift in emphasis toward measurement and adoption of automation as the headline issue.
Automation is framed as the answer to the security skills gap
John Jeremiah treats staffing shortfalls as the entry point for automation arguments.
Read more
The claim runs: repetitive tasks are moved off human analysts, fewer manual interventions mean faster and more accurate threat detection, and companies that do this improve security while cutting costs. This is the same staff-pressure logic as the Time to Automation post, but expressed as cost and workload relief rather than as a response-time metric.
A post asks whether automation is the answer to the cybersecurity skills gap and describes Traceable director of sales Leor Golan joining Cybovate for a panel on that question, with real-world examples of companies improving security and reducing costs.
Adoption is stuck between stated priority and real maturity
The argument is that security leaders already agree automation matters, and the gap is operational.
Read more
Most organisations call automation a top strategic priority, yet few describe their programs as mature.
Deployment friction and the absence of continuous optimisation are presented as the actual blockers, with centralised teams and AI agents for threat detection as emerging responses.
The figures belong to the BlinkOps 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report, based on a survey of more than 1,000 security decision-makers.
The post reports that 81% call automation a top strategic priority, 45% took nearly three months to deploy their most recent automation, 53% plan to use AI agents for autonomous threat detection, 45% are building centralised teams to manage automation, and only 6% describe mature programs with continuous optimisation.
Fundamentals still matter: a SOC framework decides whether response is organised or reactive
On day-to-day operations, the position is more instructional than argumentative: threats arrive through phishing, weak passwords and software flaws, and teams need a structure to catch them early.
Read more
A SOC framework is described as a blueprint for staying organised, setting priorities and reacting faster; without one, operations become messy, slow and reactive. Framework choice depends on company size, industry and risk rather than on one best option.
The post previews a linked blog covering what a SOC framework is, the most widely used frameworks and how they differ, and how to pick one for a given company's size, industry and risks.
Pair live demonstration with expert explanation when presenting security technology
Across the posts, a recurring delivery priority is to show and discuss claims about security products, not just announce them.
Read more
Product demonstrations are paired with expert talks on the same subject, and the chosen topics — API security, Zero Trust, fraud — reflect where John Jeremiah expects buyer attention to sit.
The Black Hat USA 2023 post invites visitors to a booth programme built around live API security platform demonstrations, expert talks on API security, Zero Trust and fraud, and prizes. It frames event contact as a way to discuss pressing API security challenges and build connections.
The 2023 post leans on conference presence and API security as its headline subject, while later posts lean on report findings and panels, suggesting the channel emphasis moved from event contact toward research-driven discussion.
Answers the question "how does this person frame security automation?"
Read more
Start here: it names a specific metric and argument rather than offering general enthusiasm, so you can see the stance quickly.
The post argues that slow automation is now a security team's biggest vulnerability.
It says security teams are understaffed and overwhelmed, cites a cybersecurity talent gap expected to reach 85 million workers by 2030, and says traditional SOAR platforms cannot keep up because they require complex coding and scripting to automate workflows.
It points to a blog by Traceable co-founder and chief executive Gil Barak that treats Time to Automation (TTA) as the most important security metric and reports a claim that faster automation reduces response times by 99.999%.
The post lists three points from the blog: outdated automation creating gaps rather than closing them, AI-driven workflows shrinking response times from months to seconds, and focusing on TTA to stay ahead of evolving threats.
For brands planning a campaign
A ready-made webinar angle: debate whether time to automation beats coverage breadth.
The 99.999% response-time figure and the 85 million-worker talent-gap figure are quotable hooks a vendor can ask the creator to defend or qualify live.
The strongest numbers come from a linked blog by Gil Barak, so ask the creator to bring the underlying data rather than present it as personal research.
Answers the question "what data anchors the claims about automation adoption?"
Read more
Start here for a numbers-driven view: the percentages show exactly where adoption stalls.
The post announces the 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report from BlinkOps, based on a survey of more than 1,000 security decision-makers.
It reports that 81% call automation a top strategic priority, 45% took nearly three months to deploy their most recent automation, 53% plan to use AI agents for autonomous threat detection, 45% are building centralized teams to manage automation, and only 6% describe mature automation programs with continuous optimization.
The report covers what drives progress, where gaps remain, and how new architectures are forming around intelligent automation.
The post recommends the research to security leaders, SOC staff and enterprise architects.
For brands planning a campaign
The five percentages give a webinar a structure of their own: stated priority, deployment lag and maturity gap.
A vendor can position itself against the three-month deployment figure and the 6% maturity figure.
The numbers come from BlinkOps, so the creator should cite the source rather than present them as their own research.
Ask to see the report before building claims on its figures.
Answers the question "can this person explain security operations to someone who does not know the vocabulary?"
Read more
Start here for plain definitions rather than opinion.
The post opens with the premise that attackers always look for ways in, whether through phishing, weak passwords or software flaws, and that security teams need a plan to catch threats early and respond before damage is done.
It defines a SOC framework as a blueprint that helps teams stay organized, set priorities and react faster, and says that without one, security operations become messy, slow and reactive.
It lists what the linked blog covers: what a SOC framework is and how it helps teams work smarter, the most widely used frameworks and what makes them different, and how to choose based on a company's size, industry and risks.
For brands planning a campaign
This is an explainer rather than a position piece, so it fits a webinar segment for less mature buyers, such as "which SOC framework fits your organisation." It shows the creator can cover vendor-neutral fundamentals while a product link handles the commercial traffic—useful when a vendor wants education to precede a pitch.
Answers the question "how is the skills gap used as a reason to buy automation?"
Read more
Start here to see the topic pairing that runs through the other posts.
The post asks whether automation is the answer to the cybersecurity skills gap and says Traceable's director of sales, Leor Golan, joined Cybovate for a panel discussion on the challenge.
It argues that automating repetitive tasks frees teams to focus on critical threats, reducing human intervention leads to faster and more accurate threat detection, and real companies have improved security and cut costs with automation.
It frames 2025 as the start of a Cybovate panel series on key security topics, beginning with security automation.
For brands planning a campaign
The format is reusable for a vendor webinar: a sponsored discussion between a vendor speaker and an outside platform, built on a non-product hook.
The post also shows that the skills-gap frame is this account's entry point for automation content.
A webinar that leads with automation as cost reduction rather than as technology would match the existing messaging.
Answers the question "how does this person appear in person and what do they pitch?"
Read more
Start here for the clearest example of the API security subject a webinar could cover.
Written in the first person, the post invites readers to see the author and the team at Black Hat USA 2023, described as a key stop on the calendar and a chance to build connections and discuss pressing API security challenges.
It sets out the booth programme: live demonstrations of an API security platform, expert talks on API security, Zero Trust and fraud, and prizes for visitors who engage with the team.
The post closes with event hashtags for Black Hat and Black Hat USA.
The event took place in 2023, so this documents a past event rather than a current plan.
For brands planning a campaign
Shows a conference-booth model of demos, expert talks and giveaways around API security that a vendor could adapt into webinar segments or a live-event tie-in for an API security campaign. The post dates to 2023, so treat it as a format reference, not evidence of current plans.
A Black Hat USA 2023 post invites people to Traceable’s booth for product demos, expert talks, and prizes.
Read more
The program covers API security, Zero Trust, and fraud. It frames API security as a pressing challenge and Traceable as a platform for API security use cases.
For brands planning a campaign
A vendor can consider John Jeremiah for event-adjacent content or a thought leadership webinar pairing live demos with expert discussion of API security, Zero Trust, and fraud. The post’s format of demos and booth talks could translate into a webinar segment.
Security automation urgency and Time to Automation
A post argues that slow automation is now a security team’s biggest vulnerability.
Read more
It cites an expected cybersecurity talent gap of 85 million workers by 2030, says traditional SOAR platforms require complex coding and scripting, and promotes a blog by Gil Barak, Traceable’s co-founder and CEO, on Time to Automation. The blog covers how outdated automation creates gaps, AI-driven workflows shrink response times, and teams need to focus on Time to Automation.
For brands planning a campaign
A cybersecurity vendor can consider John Jeremiah for a webinar on AI-driven automation focused on operational urgency: reducing response time, replacing slow SOAR workflows, and measuring time to automation.
AI-driven security automation research and adoption gaps
A post shares BlinkOps’ 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report, based on a survey of more than 1,000 security decision-makers.
Read more
Findings include: 81% say automation is a top strategic priority, 45% took nearly three months to deploy their most recent automation, 53% plan to use AI agents for autonomous threat detection, 45% are building centralized teams, and only 6% report mature automation with continuous optimization.
For brands planning a campaign
John Jeremiah could suit a research-led webinar or panel translating survey findings into adoption guidance for security leaders, SOC teams, and enterprise architects.
A post explains that hackers exploit phishing, weak passwords, and software flaws, and that security teams need a plan to catch threats early.
Read more
It presents a SOC framework as a blueprint for staying organized, setting priorities, and reacting faster. The post promotes a blog on what a SOC framework is, widely used frameworks, and how to choose one based on company size, industry, and risks.
For brands planning a campaign
A vendor can consider John Jeremiah for a practical webinar or guide on selecting and applying SOC frameworks, especially for teams formalizing detection and response.
A post announces a panel discussion with Cybovate featuring Traceable’s director of sales, Leor Golan, on the cybersecurity skills gap.
Read more
It says automation removes repetitive tasks so teams can focus on critical threats, reduces human intervention for faster and more accurate threat detection, and includes real-world examples of companies improving security and cutting costs. It also notes that Cybovate is launching a 2025 panel series starting with security automation.
For brands planning a campaign
John Jeremiah could suit a panel-style thought leadership webinar connecting automation to staff shortages with concrete examples. The post demonstrates an external panel collaboration format a vendor could adapt.
John Jeremiah's saved LinkedIn posts document employment with two cybersecurity companies.
Read more
They posted as part of Traceable around Black Hat USA 2023 and BlinkOps in 2025, referring to 'our Co-Founder and CEO' and 'our latest blog' while promoting security automation research and panels.
The posts show employment at those times.
Ask whether any sponsorship, affiliate, client, investment, or owned-business relationship is involved.
Traceable
Employment · 2023-08
John Jeremiah posted as part of Traceable for Black Hat USA 2023, writing 'we Traceable will be participating' and referring to 'our booth' and 'our cutting-edge API security platform.'
In 2025 posts, John Jeremiah identified with BlinkOps, referring to 'our Co-Founder and CEO' and 'our latest blog' while sharing BlinkOps' AI-driven security automation report, a SOC framework blog, and a security automation panel.
John Jeremiah's posts ask how quickly a security team can turn knowledge into action.
Read more
They cover three strands.
First, automation: posts argue that slow, script-heavy automation is the real vulnerability and point readers to a Time to Automation blog and the BlinkOps 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report.
Second, operational basics: a SOC framework explainer helps teams consider how to organise detection and response.
Third, API security, Zero Trust and fraud, covered through conference and panel appearances rather than written argument.
The posts span 2023 to 2025 and speak to security leaders, SOC teams and enterprise architects.
For a brief requiring original analysis, ask for writing samples beyond the linked blogs, reports and named colleagues' analysis.
Both write about moving security beyond AI experiments and into everyday use.
Read more
Anuj Goel's Black Hat USA 2026 post and John Jeremiah's automation posts identify the same problem: threat intelligence and automation matter only when they inform decisions teams can act on in existing workflows.
Anuj Goel draws on firsthand conference observation and a specific vendor partnership to explain how real-time asset intelligence joins threat feeds inside agentic workflows. John Jeremiah's posts draw on a colleague's blog and a third-party survey, focusing on automation speed and adoption.
Both frame a program's weakness as a failure of focus, not a shortage of findings or tools, and give teams a name for that failure: time to automation or threat debt.
Read more
Jonathan Baker writes about vulnerability and exposure management, arguing that breaking the paths between findings and critical assets matters more than patching faster.
They also publish their own framing of the idea.
John Jeremiah's posts focus more on automation adoption and API security, often drawing on named colleagues' analysis.
Both use recurring, format-driven LinkedIn series to explain security risk to a professional audience and connect technical failures to business and compliance consequences.
Read more
Muli Motola's interview-based series focuses on identity and access management, with CISOs describing IAM failures and their regulatory exposure. John Jeremiah's research- and event-led posts centre on automation, SOC operations and API security.
The only measured audience figure in the posts is John Jeremiah’s LinkedIn follower count: 3,440, recorded on 8 October 2026.
Read more
The posts provide no impressions, engagement, click or viewer data to compare reach across topics or formats.
The account covers API security, security automation and related security operations practices.
Four of the five posts promote work by others at the same company: a co-founder’s blog on time to automation, a sales director’s panel on the skills gap, a company-authored report on AI-driven security automation and a company blog on SOC frameworks.
This suggests the account also serves as a company amplifier, rather than solely as a personal publishing channel.
For a thought leadership webinar on API security and AI-driven automation, the posts support a topic match.
Before committing, ask for reach and engagement results for API security and automation posts over the last two quarters, and for any sponsored or co-hosted webinar the account has promoted.
If reaching security leadership, SOC practitioners or enterprise architects is essential, ask for audience survey results or another documented source covering job function and seniority.
John Jeremiah's posts do not mention a creator-side partnership program, sponsorship policy, rate card, or booking route.
Read more
They mostly promote companies and events from a Traceable team perspective: an invitation to meet the team at Black Hat USA 2023 for product demos, booth talks, and prizes; a pointer to a Traceable co-founder's blog on security automation speed; a pointer to a SOC framework blog; a summary of BlinkOps' 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report with a download link; and a note about a Traceable sales director joining a Cybovate panel on the cybersecurity skills gap.
The posts show co-marketing with employers and industry events, but not paid formats or terms.
Ask directly about available formats, scope, and terms.
Brief: a security automation vendor wants an outside voice for a 45-minute thought leadership webinar on the move from script-heavy security automation to AI-driven workflows, aimed at security leaders, SOC managers, and enterprise architects, co-presented with a vendor speaker on API security and automation.
Read more
John Jeremiah fits this brief, with conditions.
The posts carry the argument the brief needs.
A March 2025 post calls slow automation a security team's biggest vulnerability, cites a cybersecurity talent gap expected to reach 85 million workers by 2030, says traditional SOAR platforms require complex coding and scripting to automate workflows, and promotes a blog by a Traceable co-founder that treats Time to Automation as the most important security metric.
That gives the webinar its central tension: speed of automation, not breadth of coverage.
A July 2025 post gives supporting numbers from the BlinkOps 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report, a survey of more than 1,000 security decision-makers: 81% call automation a top strategic priority, 45% took nearly three months to deploy their most recent automation, 53% plan to use AI agents for autonomous threat detection, and only 6% describe mature programs with continuous optimization.
Those figures give the discussion a clear shape.
The posts also show a fit with the format.
A 2025 post shows a Traceable sales director joining Cybovate for a panel on the cybersecurity skills gap, an external co-hosted discussion like the one proposed here.
It uses automation-as-cost-reduction, rather than automation-as-technology, as the entry point.
A 2025 SOC framework post shows the account can explain security operations in plain terms for less mature buyers, which matters if part of the audience is still forming a response program.
The 2023 Black Hat post shows a live demos-plus-expert-talks format around API security, Zero Trust, and fraud that could translate into webinar segments.
Before booking, confirm the billing and on-screen description: the posts do not state Jeremiah's job title or employer.
The strongest numbers are attributed to others, not to Jeremiah's own research, so the webinar should credit the report and blog rather than present them as the creator's findings.
Ask for recent results from comparable content and audience job-function data before setting reach targets; the posts provide no engagement, reach, or audience-composition data.
Partnership formats, rates, and a booking route are also undocumented, so agree on scope and terms directly.
When to choose a specialist
Brief: a security platform vendor wants a named reviewer to run its own public head-to-head lab test of three competing SOAR products, publish the raw benchmark results, and deliver a guaranteed 25,000 security practitioners, converting at a defined rate, under a published sponsorship package.
Read more
This need does not fit what the posts show.
Four of the five posts relay research produced by others: a Traceable co-founder's blog on Time to Automation, a BlinkOps report on AI-driven security automation, a Traceable company blog on SOC frameworks, and a Traceable sales director's panel with Cybovate.
The posts show no original dataset, public product benchmark, or public tool testing by John Jeremiah.
The quoted figures, including the 99.999% response-time reduction claim and the BlinkOps survey percentages, come from those linked originals.
Because the originals are not included, their methods and authorship cannot be checked here.
The audience evidence is weaker still.
No post gives impressions, clicks, viewer, or engagement figures.
The only measured audience datapoint is a LinkedIn follower count of 3,440 recorded on 8 October 2026, with no breakdown by job function, seniority, or company.
That cannot support a guaranteed practitioner-reach commitment or conversion rate.
There is also no published partnership program, rate card, sponsor policy, or booking route, so the posts offer no basis for planning a standard package or fixed price.
The brief depends on three things the posts do not show: the creator's own measurements, a verified audience of a stated size and composition, and a documented commercial format.
Ask for evidence of all three before proceeding; until then, pause the brief rather than rework it around the creator.
A worked campaign example
Worked campaign angle for the security automation webinar with API security and AI-driven automation.
Working title: Time to Automation: why security teams take three months to deploy the automation they have already bought.
Format and run of show: a 45-minute live webinar with a vendor speaker and John Jeremiah as the outside voice, plus a 30-minute replay clip for follow-up email.
Segment one, five minutes: introduce the deployment gap as a question rather than a pitch.
The 45% who took nearly three months to deploy their most recent automation and the 6% reporting mature programs with continuous optimization frame the discussion.
Segment two, ten minutes: the vendor speaker explains what a shorter path from purchase to working automation looks like, with a live product moment kept to this segment.
Segment three, fifteen minutes: Jeremiah makes the case that slow automation is a security team's biggest vulnerability, discusses the 85 million-worker talent gap figure, and explains why traditional SOAR platforms that require complex coding and scripting leave teams stuck.
Segment four, ten minutes: outline a practical sequence for choosing a detection and response framework and automating repetitive tasks first, drawing on the SOC framework posts and addressing the less mature half of the audience.
Segment five, five minutes: questions and a downloadable checklist.
Deliverables: the live session, a short written explainer built from the same segments for the vendor's resource library, the 30-minute clip, and the checklist.
Before recording, confirm the underlying numbers behind the Time to Automation claim and the 99.999% response-time figure, or agree to attribute them on air to the co-founder's blog.
Attribute the BlinkOps percentages visibly and secure permission to reuse them.
Confirm Jeremiah's job title and employer for billing and on-screen display; the posts do not state either.
The vendor should provide two recent comparable webinar results, including registration, attendance, and follow-up numbers, to set expectations against the account's actual performance.
If the campaign depends on reaching security leaders or SOC practitioners, ask for audience job-function and seniority data; the follower count of 3,440 does not show who is behind it.
Agree on a signed scope covering the API security framing, since the API security posts are about a 2023 conference booth programme rather than recent content.
Measurement: compare the registration-to-attendance rate against the vendor's own baseline, count checklist downloads, and track whether attendees from SOC roles book follow-up calls. Use the replay clip's view-through as a soft measure of whether the deployment-gap framing held attention.
Next step: a 30-minute scoping call to confirm attribution terms, the job title for billing, and comparable-results data. Do not schedule the webinar until those three items are resolved; the angle relies on numbers Jeremiah would be relaying, not producing.
Choose Anuj Goel over John Jeremiah when the webinar centers on operationalizing threat intelligence with AI agents, not the adoption speed of security automation.
Read more
Their posts address which AI agents actually deliver results, naming four practical tests: contextualizing a threat against the organization's own assets, environment, and priorities; deciding whether a newly disclosed vulnerability creates meaningful risk; prioritizing intelligence instead of deepening analyst fatigue; and carrying intelligence from what an analyst knows to what the organization has acted on.
The second post adds a concrete vendor example: Cyware's partnership with Armis from ServiceNow to enrich external threat feeds with customer-specific asset context and operationalize them into Agentic AI workflows.
That makes this a tighter fit for a vendor webinar that wants to demonstrate AI agents working on real operational problems rather than re-explain the automation backlog.
Anuj Goel's posts focus on threat intelligence and asset context, not API security or the shift from script-heavy SOAR to AI-driven automation.
A vendor selling API security automation would need to build the API-specific bridge.
The posts are event commentary and a partnership announcement, not an independent dataset or benchmark.
Compared with John Jeremiah, the webinar would gain a stronger operational-AI narrative and lose the specific Time to Automation, SOAR-coding, and BlinkOps survey material that already frames the deployment gap.
Ask for audience data and booking terms before committing.
Choose Jonathan Baker over John Jeremiah when the webinar should center on prioritization and proof rather than automation adoption.
Read more
Their posts offer a usable four-action spine: map crown jewels through the adversaries relevant to industry, geography, and technology; validate defenses against documented TTPs rather than generic scenarios; inventory AI exposure, including agents, automation frameworks, and MCP servers; and accelerate detection engineering so alert triage, SIEM correlation, and containment can run at AI-augmented attack speed.
The threat-debt post sharpens that into a memorable claim: findings in a backlog are not dangerous on their own; they become dangerous when they line up into a path an adversary can walk.
For a vendor webinar, that supports a segment on choosing what to fix first with evidence rather than patch volume.
Jonathan Baker's posts focus on exposure management, threat-informed defense, and threat debt, not API security, security automation buying, or AI-driven workflow adoption.
The one AI-adjacent section treats AI systems as assets to inventory and validate, not as an automation engine for the SOC.
A vendor whose pitch is shortening time to automation would need to translate the argument.
The posts point to a blog and a planned webinar.
Compared with John Jeremiah, the webinar would gain a risk-prioritization and validation angle and lose the survey numbers, the SOAR critique, and the existing panel format.
Choose Muli Motola over John Jeremiah when the webinar's topic is identity and access management as the breach path, not API security and automation.
Read more
Their posts frame a differentiated CISO conversation: unauthorized data access as the nightmare scenario; the point that unauthorized access can itself be a reportable incident and trigger GDPR fines even without exfiltration; the dual requirement to keep unauthorized users out while preserving authorized investigation and legal access; and the operational risks from privileged access and overlooked legacy systems. The Identity Nightmares interview series gives the webinar a ready-made format: a named practitioner tells a failure story and draws out lessons.
Muli Motola's posts do not address API security, SOAR platforms, AI-driven security automation, or the Time to Automation argument anchoring the vendor's campaign.
An IAM-focused vendor could make this work; an API security and automation vendor would be buying a different webinar.
The posts promote interviews with third-party CISOs, not original research or product demonstrations.
Compared with John Jeremiah, the webinar would gain a compliance-and-identity angle and lose the automation-speed narrative entirely.
John Jeremiah published five full LinkedIn posts from 2023 to 2025: a Black Hat USA 2023 booth announcement; a post on slow automation and Time to Automation; a summary of the BlinkOps 2025 State of AI-Driven Security Automation report; a SOC framework explainer; and a post about a Cybovate panel on automation and the cybersecurity skills gap.
John Jeremiah's posts do not include the linked blogs, survey report or panel video, so quoted figures and findings are attributed to their named authors.
The posts do not state a job title, and they do not publish engagement or audience-composition data.
