Suddenly, Everyone Has a Clearinghouse

The past few weeks have felt like a parade of press releases. Company after company has stepped up to announce its own clearinghouse — a new platform, a new promise, a new way to handle data or transactions. It’s a crowded field, and the announcements keep piling up.

Our team joined the chorus, too. We announced Athena. But there’s a catch: when we told the world about it, the product wasn’t a PowerPoint slide or a beta waiting list. It was already live. Real customers were using it. Fixes were being shipped. The code had been running quietly for months.

Why the Rush to Announce?

It’s tempting to ask: why now? Why did so many clearinghouses suddenly emerge in the same window? Part of the answer is market timing. The industry has reached a point where a clearinghouse isn’t a nice-to-have; it’s becoming table stakes. Companies that don’t have one risk looking like they’re falling behind.

But there’s another layer. Announcing early can signal ambition to investors, partners, and customers. It builds buzz. It creates a narrative. The problem? Many of these announcements are vapor — promises without a product behind them. They’re built on roadmaps, not running code.

Athena: Built in Silence, Shipped in Secret

That’s where Athena broke the mold. The team behind it didn’t start building when the trend emerged. They started because customers kept asking for a solution — a real one, not a concept. So they built it. Quietly. No press releases, no teaser campaigns.

They took findings from early users and turned them into fixes. They iterated. They made mistakes, corrected them, and kept shipping. The product grew organically, shaped by actual demand rather than a product manager’s whiteboard.

“We only announced it now because everyone else started announcing theirs,” one team member said. The implication is clear: Athena was never about the announcement. It was about the work.

What Sets a Live Platform Apart

There’s a fundamental difference between a clearinghouse that’s been running for months and one that’s still in development. A live platform has battle scars. It has handled edge cases. It has real data flowing through it, which means real insights about what works and what doesn’t.

For customers, that difference matters. A live platform means:

• Immediate value — no waiting for a launch date.
• Proven reliability — bugs have been found and fixed.
• Real feedback loops — the product evolves based on usage, not assumptions.

In a summer of clearinghouse announcements, Athena stands out because it was already doing the job while others were still drafting their blog posts.

The Noise vs. The Signal

So what should customers and industry watchers take away from this wave of announcements? First, it’s worth asking: is the product real? Can you use it today? Does it have a track record, even a short one?

Second, look for specificity. Vague claims about “revolutionizing” or “transforming” something are easy to make. Concrete numbers — users onboarded, transactions processed, bugs squashed — are harder to fake. Athena had those numbers before the first press release went out.

Finally, remember that a clearinghouse is only as good as the work behind it. The hype cycle will pass. What remains are the platforms that actually solve problems. In this summer of clearinghouses, one was already solving them — quietly, steadily, and without fanfare — long before the announcements started.

Why LG Is Cracking Down on Proxy SDKs

LG Electronics announced this week it will suspend any smart TV apps that turn televisions into always-on residential proxy nodes. The move comes less than a month after researchers revealed that over 42 percent of games and utilities on LG’s webOS store let unknown third parties route internet traffic through users’ TVs.

Security firm Spur published findings in early July showing that residential proxy software development kits (SDKs) have quietly infiltrated smart TV platforms. For Samsung’s Tizen OS, more than a quarter of apps contained similar components. The data suggests a systemic problem, not an isolated incident.

What Are Residential Proxies Doing in Your TV?

Residential proxy networks pay app developers to embed SDKs that turn a device into a proxy node. Paying customers then rent that node to route their own traffic through it. In LG and Samsung smart TVs, Spur found these SDKs bundled with everything from Pac-Man clones to screensavers and file managers.

A Pac-Man app from Bright Data even offers users a choice: watch ads or let the TV serve as a proxy node. Bright Data, which accounted for the majority of proxy SDKs on both platforms, did not respond to requests for comment.

Bright Data and other providers claim they follow rigorous know-your-customer processes to prevent abuse. They also say they deploy countermeasures that stop proxy customers from interacting with other devices on the user’s local network. But critics argue that a one-time consent prompt buried in a TV app is not enough.

LG’s Response: Suspensions and Policy Changes

LG Senior Vice President John Taylor told KrebsOnSecurity that the company is working with developers to remove residential proxy options from their apps. Developers that fail to comply will see their apps suspended.

“A residential proxy network is not an intended use for LG smart TVs,” Taylor said. “LG Electronics is working with developers to remove the residential proxy option from their apps on the webOS platform. If this option is not removed, these apps will be suspended.”

Taylor added that the review is “well underway now.” LG will also strengthen its evaluation process for developer-submitted apps, including those that incorporate proxy SDKs.

The Deeper Problem: Consent and Awareness

Spur’s Trevor Sutter put it bluntly: “A one-time consent prompt buried in a TV app is not a substitute for meaningful transparency, ongoing control, and platform oversight. The risk is amplified when consent comes from individuals within the household who use the device but shouldn’t give consent, such as minors.”

Most consumers do not think of their smart TV as a computer. They don’t audit apps or check for background network activity. That makes residential proxies particularly insidious. The device sits in the living room, always on, always connected — an ideal node for someone who wants to hide their traffic behind a real residential IP address.

Spur’s report notes that the problem is not that residential proxy networks exist, but that they are being embedded at scale in devices that most people cannot easily monitor.

LG’s Other Controversy: McAfee Bloatware

LG’s announcement comes amid criticism over another partnership. This week, the YouTube channel Gamers Nexus showed that certain LG LCD monitors automatically install an app promoting paid McAfee antivirus subscriptions. The app arrives through Windows Update without any approval prompt. Users reported that the software drivers push McAfee promotions without consent, triggering frustration among gamers and professionals alike.

LG has not yet commented on the McAfee issue. But the combination of proxy SDKs in smart TVs and unwanted antivirus promotions in monitors suggests a pattern: LG is comfortable embedding third-party monetization in its hardware, often without clear user consent.

What This Means for LG Users

For now, LG’s crackdown on residential proxies is a positive step. Users should check which apps are installed on their webOS smart TVs and remove any they do not recognize. If an app offers a choice between ads and “network sharing,” the safest option is to uninstall it entirely.

The company says it will continue to review apps and enforce the ban. Whether that translates into real change — or just a temporary PR move — remains to be seen. But for the millions of LG smart TV owners, the message is clear: your television should not be a tool for strangers to hide their internet activity.

As Spur’s research showed, the problem extends beyond LG. Samsung has not announced any similar action for its Tizen platform. Consumers who want to avoid residential proxies altogether may need to look beyond the app store — or consider whether they need a smart TV at all.

Not Your Typical Hacker Story

Andreas Gaetje won’t pretend he spent his teenage years breaking into systems or writing exploits. He didn’t. The CISO at Körber AG came to cybersecurity from economics and business politics — a route that was unusual in the 1990s and still raises eyebrows today.

“I’m not the deepest bit-crawler,” Gaetje admits. “That’s just not who I am.” And yet, he now leads security for a global technology and manufacturing group with roughly 13,000 employees across 100 locations. Körber’s machines are behind much of the world’s pharmaceutical supply chain. “Probably every vaccine you ever received has been through our machines,” he notes.

His story is a useful counterpoint to the idea that you need to be a hardcore technical wizard to become a CISO. What you do need, Gaetje argues, is a deep understanding of business, the ability to learn constantly, and the trust of the people around you.

From Public Service Dreams to a Consulting Detour

Gaetje didn’t set out to work in security. In the mid-1990s, fresh out of university with a focus on economics and business politics, he expected to land a job in public services. But reality intervened. He needed money immediately, not someday.

The internet was just beginning to transform from an academic niche into a business necessity. Email was becoming the default communication tool. Gaetje made a pragmatic pivot: “I said to myself, Okay, let’s maybe do something in the computer business.”

He joined a consulting firm, hoping to blend his interest in business and technology. But by the early 2000s, he realized that to truly focus on business inside IT, he needed depth in a single sector. He chose finance. “The best industry at that point in time, where IT was really crucial, was the finance industry,” he recalls. He joined an insurance company as an auditor.

The Compliance Era That Changed Everything

Back then, cybersecurity wasn’t the existential business threat it is today. “ITsec and audit had a natural affinity,” Gaetje explains. “ITsec was primarily about compliance — it wasn’t yet the business threat it has since become.” His mix of business knowledge, IT understanding, and audit experience put him in the right place at the right time.

When cybersecurity began to explode as a discipline, he was asked to manage the growing information security function. The real turning point came in the 2010s, with attacks like WannaCry and NotPetya. “It was very clear: we weren’t talking about a simple compliance issue anymore. This was a serious business threat,” he says. “Cybersecurity had become a hot topic. It was complex, innovative, and really interesting to work in.”

By 2018, Gaetje was CISO at Körber IT Solutions. A year later, he took the top security role at the parent company, Körber AG.

Career Advice: Don’t Get Stuck in One SECTOR

Gaetje credits much of his growth to a single piece of advice: if you want to truly understand security, don’t stay too long in one company or one industry. Different sectors have different risk profiles. Stay in one place too long, and your thinking can get rigid. Attackers change fast. You need to be able to change how you think.

“It’s what made me move from the insurance industry into manufacturing and machine building,” he says. “I wanted to learn something else, to experience something new, and do something different.”

What Makes a Security Leader?

Gaetje is blunt about his own leadership style. “I’m not a born leader. I would never consider that,” he says. But he has a clear philosophy: a leader provides direction and a vision of what can be achieved and how. In any group, someone emerges as the de facto leader. The challenge is to justify that dominance with reliability and trust.

“It’s something you can learn,” he insists. “It’s not something that comes out of the blue. I learned and enhanced that learning with training courses. But of course, your personality is also important. You need to be reliable — you need to be a person that people trust, otherwise it just doesn’t work.”

Leadership, Gaetje believes, isn’t limited to formal management titles. “You’re a leader, even if it’s a thought leader driving and directing other people in a specific direction.”

Building a Security Team in a Talent Crisis

The cybersecurity skills gap is well documented — estimates in 2025 ranged from 2.8 million to 4.8 million unfilled positions globally. Gaetje has felt that pressure firsthand. “In recruiting your team, you have a wish list, and then you have reality — and unfortunately, they don’t always fit together,” he says.

But one requirement is non-negotiable: “I need people who want to learn.” The cybersecurity landscape shifts so fast that prior experience matters less than curiosity. “It’s incredible how fast things change. So, what I always need are people who are engaged, can think out of the box, and want to go the extra mile to understand what’s going on.”

Training and career development he can provide. But that initial spark of enthusiasm? That’s on the candidate. “So, whether I’m looking for an engineer, an analyst or some junior position, experience is good, but enthusiasm to learn is necessary.”

Would He Hire a Hacker?

“That depends,” Gaetje says. The hacker mentality — built-in curiosity and persistence — is valuable. But there are two types. “White hackers I would employ; blackhats, no.” He isn’t comfortable bringing someone with a history of malicious activity into Körber.

His advice to ambitious team members is simple: “Be curious. Things are really changing. If you think you know everything about anything, you’re wrong. That’s never true. There’s always something new coming for you to learn and experience.”

AI: The Double-Edged Sword That’s Reshaping Security

Gaetje’s biggest concern today isn’t a specific threat — it’s the sheer speed of technological change. “Just think about the many things you’ve learned in the last few weeks, about new developments, new products and new techniques that have been deployed to the public. AI is an example — we learn new things about the potential of generative AI and agentic AI every week. What used to occur over a period of two years or more now happens in a couple of weeks.”

AI presents a unique challenge because it’s used by both attackers and defenders. Attackers are using it to scale and sophisticate their operations. Defenders are fighting back with their own AI, but those defenses can be manipulated. Meanwhile, shadow AI — systems deployed without IT or security knowledge — is proliferating inside organizations.

“The pace of new technology is truly hard to manage,” Gaetje says. “For each new technology you must find time to learn and understand it — but that’s on top of everything else you’re already doing. And it’s not just you — everyone on your team must find time to understand the new technology, and you must personally motivate them to do so when they are already fully occupied.”

Will AI reduce the need for human security staff? Gaetje doesn’t think so. “I think the role of cybersecurity, and even my own role will be much more important in the future than it is today. But it may change.” As AI spreads across the business, security problems will become too widespread for the security team to handle alone. Other departments — product development, software engineering — will need to be brought into the fold.

The Risk of Losing Core Skills

Gaetje worries that AI could erode foundational skills, especially among programmers and SOC analysts. “AI coding assistants require prompt engineers and architects above programmers — and that can be a problem. How do you bring people from this level to the next level if they are not able to program on their own?”

A similar issue looms for security analysts. The standard view is that AI will collapse the SOC tier hierarchy — no more tier 1 analysts doing triage because AI will handle it. But Gaetje asks: “If the security analyst job can be done via an agentic AI tool, then how will analysts learn how to analyze an event? Maybe in the future, if we just rely on AI, we will lose the ability to see the tricky things in the incident.”

Still, he’s not pessimistic. “I’m pretty sure we will find different ways to handle the changes. And honestly, there’s so much out there that I’m not really concerned that we will lose anything.”

The real challenge, he says, is guiding the security team through this transition. “The job of the security team will change dramatically in the future. That’s my strong belief. The CISO challenge is to help team members along this road to a new level, where they are able to think out of the box to see what else they can bring to the job.”

For more insights from security leaders, check out our other CISO Conversations with Aimee Cardwell and Tarah Wheeler.