PASSED! Jeanne’s Experience Taking the AI-Empowered SAFe Advanced Scrum Master Exam

Today I took the AI-Empowered SAFe Advanced Scrum Master certification and passed with a score of 96=7%. Passing is 82%. Like the SAFe for ScrumMaster (read about my experience) and SAFe Practitioner (read about my experience), I was optimizing for passing quickly. It went well as I was familiar with the material, not distracted and a lot of the questions were “common sense.”

Why I decided to take the Advanced Scrum Master certification now

As background, I’ve been a part time SM (and rest of the time developer) for well over a decade and been on a SAFe team for a number of years.

I use AI way more in the developer part of my job than the Scrum Master part. While I’ve done somethings like help the team make retros for more fun, I want to do more. I didn’t notice it was an “Advanced” Scrum Master course until the class started. Which is fine; I have enough experience.

That turned out to be good because the class does a lot of group activities. People with experience by definition have more experiences to share.

My path to certification

  • October 20-21 – took training course – 8 hours (including lunch breaks) a day for two days. I was happy with the class and my breakout group although a full day class on line is a lot.
  • evening of October 21 – Took the practice exam; got a 93%. Well I’m ready. The practice exam tells you which ones you got wrong which is nice. I was pleased I did that well. After work yesterday, I went the NYC Scrum User group and got home late. So I was tired when taking it which is something that makes my attention to detail again.
  • evening of October 22 – Took the real exam. Got a 97%. (The previous time I took a cert for SAFe I got the same score on the practice and real exams. I don’t know if I scored higher on the real because I wasn’t tired or luck of the draw.

I didn’t review the material, but I also didn’t have time to forget it. Also, a lot of the questions are scenario based on basic coaching or agile principles. Some were SAFe specific. And some where about AI.

What I got wrong

Given my score of 97%, I got two questions wrong on the real exam. One was on “accelerating and measuring team flow” and one was on “facilitating the problem-solving workshop”

The exam

Like past SAFe exams, all questions were single answer multiple choice with four possible answers. Many were very easy. Some had two reasonable sounding answers. I didn’t encounter many where what you would do in SAFe and what you would do in the real world differ. (On a prior SAFe exam I did).

Logistics

The exam is non proctored and you don’t have to show your environment on camera. It was nice not to have to clean up all the programming books and papers around me. The environment is exactly the same as the practice tests one. IF you fail your first two attempts you can pay for more. Then there is a proctored or unproctored option. It’s unclear to me why someone would chose the proctored option, but it exists.

After the exam

You get a score report with the % right for each category. This part looks like the report for the practice exam. Unlike the practice exam, you don’t see the questions and which ones you got wrong specifically.

Timing

This was a 90 minute exam. I finished in under half an hour. (I take exams fast and there wasn’t a lot of thinking required. Most questions it was obvious what the right answer was.)

How to Study

Granted I didn’t study. If you feel like you understood the materials from class, I recommend taking the practice test to see where you stand. Then you can read or skim (depending on how much you remember) the course PDF. For many certs I advise not to take the practice test too early because you lose the predictive value of using it to learn how you will do. But in this case, you can take the practice exam many times if you need to and get good at identifying why all the incorrect answers are wrong.

[2026 kcdc] 6 ways you’re using chatgpt wrong (and how to fix it)

Speaker: Fred Deichler

See live blog table of contents for more posts


Off topic title changed from ScrumMaster to delivery excellent lead. The later is about multiple streams/programms(

Survey

  • Almost everyone uses AI at work
  • Most people use 2+ tools
  • A good number include a tool their employer doesn’t pay for

Item #1: The keyboard isn’t a tool; it’s a toll

  • Filters words before send them.
  • Verbally get possibly unimportant context
  • Speaker works from home using a boom mic. Tried turning headset off and just talking. Felt weird at first
  • Vomit prompt by spewing out everything thinking
  • Voice is faster than fingers on keyboard
  • The fix isn’t speed though; it’s removing the toll

Item #2: <missed the title of this because I was busy unsuccessfully trying to find a copy of the deck online>

  • Context window expanded
  • Don’t want to keep using old prompt because AI can do more. Ex: You can use an MCP server vs upload everything.
  • Spend 15 minutes a month improving your interactions
  • Hit stop if getting wrong answer so stop wasting tokens

Item #3 – You keep finding the answer; but never keep it

  • Don’t save prompts; write skills
  • When get what you need; ask AI to write you the skill
  • Using skills can use less tokens if it give it deterministic things like a python script

Item #4 – Your company bought you AI but you are choosing to use something else

  • Carrying risk
  • Exposing company secrets as training day
  • Violating HR policy
  • Missing opportunity to give company feedback to invest in better tools
  • The company AI isn’t customized the same as your home one

Item #5: Still just googling

  • Partner with AI instead of just asking questions
  • Frame what you want vs asking it. State the problem with context
  • Bring up the real constraint
  • Go back and forth
  • Tell AI what you don’t like about the answer
  • Think of as “we”

Item #6: Late to the party

  • Bring it raw thoughts vs brining something done and ask for cleanup
  • Workbench, not a stylist

Item #7: One setting to rule them alll

  • Choose right model and effort level for each tasks
  • Using same settings is burning money
  • Two dials: model and effort. Not one gear
  • Subagents thrive on lower level models

My take

Content was good, but I feel like I only got half the experience due to the slides. The slides were significantly unreadable (ex: red on black/black on red is hard to read. Same for light gray and black. Only the white on black or really big red on black was readable.). He said multiple times that will share slides after. Which is better than nothing but I want them while listening to presentation. That’s the time I’m dedicating to it and when I want to be able to follow those details. Otherwise why have so much on the slides. I looked for the deck in case it was online. Didn’t find it but did find a video with the same title. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMS-YtWDAAg Not the same mistakes (which makes sense since he said he is covering 6 or 10). But that video would have been perfectly readable on a screen. The covering 6 and having us vote on the other 2 was fun.

[2026 kcdc] mitre att&ck for developers

Speaker: Chris Ayers

See live blog table of contents for more posts


Slides/github: https://github.com/codebytes/mitre-attack-for-devs

Security has changed in last 5 years

  • Patch Tuesday has about a thousand patches. That is about as many as all of last year!
  • MS authenticator – have to type a number vs just clicking approve
  • Growing attack surface – ex: cloud
  • Sophisticated adversaries – nation-states, organized crime, insider threats. Water treatment plans
  • Complex attack chains – multiple techniques chained togehter
  • Traditional defenses – focus on single points of failure
  • Goal today is to protected identity, session and data access

OWASP

  • renamed from Open Web Application Security Project to Open Worldwide Application Security Project
  • community driven security standards
  • top 10
  • vulnerability classification, remediation guidance, prevention focus
  • Focuses on vulnerabilities from point of view of what breaks. Looks at application layer
  • Should use both OWSP and ATT&CK

MITRE ATT&CK

  • MITRE came out of the military.
  • Not community driven
  • Knowledge base
  • 14 tactics, 200+ techniques, 400_ sub techniques
  • Derived from actual cyber attacks and threat intelligence
  • MITRE also does CVEs, ATLAS (ML threats)
  • Focuses on adversary behavior from point of view of what attackers do. Looks at adversary-informed defense across entire attack lifecycle
  • More specific

ATT*CK

https://attack.mitre.org

  • Tactics – focus on the “why” of the attack
  • Techniques – how the attack happens (ex: spear phishing)
  • Sub-techniques – ex: spear phishing over email
  • Procedures – real world examples

Real world

  • Kill chain is not linear
  • Loop backs, paralel activities
  • “crooked line”

Solar winds

  • Backdoor into signed update
  • DDL executes
  • SAML credential threat
  • Command and control via DNS blending
  • Data exit over C2

Initial Access and Credential Attacks

  • Make access decisions explicit
  • SQL Injection vs parameterized queries
    • Detect credential stuffing – too many request too quckly from same IP

Execution and Command injection

  • Command injection vs command whitelisting
  • Unsafe deserialization

Persistence & Session Hijacking

  • Vulnerable session management – that last forever
  • Web shell detection – looking for extension isn’t enough. if do prevew can run JavaScript

Credential Access & Secrets

  • Try to use managed identity instead
  • Rotate secrets; better to use short lived tokens
  • Use key vault
  • Don’t put api keys/tokens in source code
  • GitHub alerts if check in a key to public repo. Can auto expire the checked in token. Even cleaning history not enough because people can subscribe to commits. Need to protected with pre-commit hook on your machine

Defense Evasion & Log Tampering

  • Correlate logs from different sources
  • Log injection
  • Tamper evident logging

Supply chain compromise

  • Malicous packages,
  • event-stream, solarwinds, log4shell, xz utils, sai hulud, notepad+, axios, etc
  • 2021 – Log4Shell was a dependency trust failure. It waa bug. People didn’t know if using because used other things that included. Also needed SBOM for own software.
  • 2024 – XZ Utils – 2 year long con.- “Jian Tan” submitted first patch in 2021. Sock pullets pressure maintainer so Jia becomes co-maintainer. Backdoor in tarballs only in 2024. Found March 29th by accident because SSH was 500ms slower from a Microsoft researcher looking at PostGres performance. Goal was to get this into Fedora so in next major release of Red Hat Linux.
  • 2025 – NotePad++ update hijack – We hosting infrastructure compromised. Web host trojanied the update.exe by adding a side loaded (loading malicious file) DLL.
  • 2026 – Axios NPM Compromise – March 31 for 3 hours there was an extra dependency with a remote access trojan. The post install script downloaded software to allow remote access. It was just a patch release so not looked at closely.

Patching is more than deploying

  • Patch the dependency -> inventory affected services
  • Restart the service -> Verify the critical workflows
  • Close the ticket -> check for prior compromise

Collection & Exfiltration

  • 2015 – anthem – slowly stole data over http request
  • 2022 – LastPass – stole tokens targetting developer’s home PC
  • Helpful to have baseline statistic on how much data usually have so know when unusual
  • API rate limiting with exfil detection

MITRE website

  • Multiple matrixes
  • Can read about details of attacks such as detection/mitigations.

My take

THere were lots of examples including technique names/numbers. I feel like I got a good feel for ATT&CK. I also poked at https://attack.mitre.org as well to get a feel for what it looks like. A lot of different items shown as well both as code and as mapping to ATT&CK. And the recent events examples.