Securosis

Research

No Metrics, No Budget (or Paycheck)

Oh goodie- another religious security debate! We do love our religious arguments so. This time it’s Amrit taking on Rothman over security metrics. Amrit likes them, Rothman doesn’t. Both of them are funny looking (sorry, it’s not germane to this post, but I figure people should know). I’m with Amrit on this one- metrics are absolutely critical. But I also agree with Mike, the wrong metrics are worse than no metrics, and pretending everything can be measured is silly. Didn’t we get over that in college? Amrit and Mike are both right; and despite my attempt to jump the shark and make this sound controversial they both probably agree more than they disagree. Security metrics are a vital evolution of our industry. We’re not artists, as much as there is an art to our science. We can’t just sit around and tell management to trust us and “no… don’t worry… we’re doing a good job. No viruses this week, right?” By the same token we can’t pretend everything we do can devolve into some simple ROI model to tell the CFO how many people to hire and how many security widgets to buy. Metrics are a valuable tool to baseline activities and track results. Metrics should help us measure both our activities and the results. Results beyond the number of incidents. Metrics also bring maturity to a discipline by, among other things, allowing that profession to communicate to the outside world. As a paramedic I might have claimed that my only metric was dropping off live bodies (preferably at a hospital), but in reality we tracked dozens of metrics- from response times, to procedural successes, to long term patient outcomes (just keeping you alive to the front door doesn’t always mean you go home). We need security metrics to: Baseline activities and investments Track those over time for deviation Correlate activities and investments to results Optimize to maximize results and minimize waste Communicate all of this to external parties CISOs that can measure and demonstrate program efficiency can more easily obtain budget for necessary improvements. It’s a combination of building trust, and being able to justify new efforts. Metrics should also include qualitative measurements. No Virginia, we can’t measure everything with real numbers, that’s why amps go to 10 (or 11). But if we use consistent qualitative models, we can gain quantitative benefits by still tracking results over time. Saying, “give us money and you won’t get hacked” won’t help you get money, ensures you lose it when you get hacked (and you will), and doesn’t help you look like a professional. On the other hand we can’t make up fake ROI models just to keep the CFO happy (one of my biggest pet peeves). You don’t do yourself any favors in the long term if you send off imaginary numbers every time someone asks for the impossible. Use real metrics. Mix quantitative and structured qualitative. Track yourself over time, correlate results, and use them to optimize efficiency (ooh- I sound like one of those professional speaker types!). Give honest answers to honest questions, and when someone asks for the ROI of a firewall ask them for the ROI on their desk.   Share:

Share:
Read Post

Totally Transparent Research is the embodiment of how we work at Securosis. It’s our core operating philosophy, our research policy, and a specific process. We initially developed it to help maintain objectivity while producing licensed research, but its benefits extend to all aspects of our business.

Going beyond Open Source Research, and a far cry from the traditional syndicated research model, we think it’s the best way to produce independent, objective, quality research.

Here’s how it works:

  • Content is developed ‘live’ on the blog. Primary research is generally released in pieces, as a series of posts, so we can digest and integrate feedback, making the end results much stronger than traditional “ivory tower” research.
  • Comments are enabled for posts. All comments are kept except for spam, personal insults of a clearly inflammatory nature, and completely off-topic content that distracts from the discussion. We welcome comments critical of the work, even if somewhat insulting to the authors. Really.
  • Anyone can comment, and no registration is required. Vendors or consultants with a relevant product or offering must properly identify themselves. While their comments won’t be deleted, the writer/moderator will “call out”, identify, and possibly ridicule vendors who fail to do so.
  • Vendors considering licensing the content are welcome to provide feedback, but it must be posted in the comments - just like everyone else. There is no back channel influence on the research findings or posts.
    Analysts must reply to comments and defend the research position, or agree to modify the content.
  • At the end of the post series, the analyst compiles the posts into a paper, presentation, or other delivery vehicle. Public comments/input factors into the research, where appropriate.
  • If the research is distributed as a paper, significant commenters/contributors are acknowledged in the opening of the report. If they did not post their real names, handles used for comments are listed. Commenters do not retain any rights to the report, but their contributions will be recognized.
  • All primary research will be released under a Creative Commons license. The current license is Non-Commercial, Attribution. The analyst, at their discretion, may add a Derivative Works or Share Alike condition.
  • Securosis primary research does not discuss specific vendors or specific products/offerings, unless used to provide context, contrast or to make a point (which is very very rare).
    Although quotes from published primary research (and published primary research only) may be used in press releases, said quotes may never mention a specific vendor, even if the vendor is mentioned in the source report. Securosis must approve any quote to appear in any vendor marketing collateral.
  • Final primary research will be posted on the blog with open comments.
  • Research will be updated periodically to reflect market realities, based on the discretion of the primary analyst. Updated research will be dated and given a version number.
    For research that cannot be developed using this model, such as complex principles or models that are unsuited for a series of blog posts, the content will be chunked up and posted at or before release of the paper to solicit public feedback, and provide an open venue for comments and criticisms.
  • In rare cases Securosis may write papers outside of the primary research agenda, but only if the end result can be non-biased and valuable to the user community to supplement industry-wide efforts or advances. A “Radically Transparent Research” process will be followed in developing these papers, where absolutely all materials are public at all stages of development, including communications (email, call notes).
    Only the free primary research released on our site can be licensed. We will not accept licensing fees on research we charge users to access.
  • All licensed research will be clearly labeled with the licensees. No licensed research will be released without indicating the sources of licensing fees. Again, there will be no back channel influence. We’re open and transparent about our revenue sources.

In essence, we develop all of our research out in the open, and not only seek public comments, but keep those comments indefinitely as a record of the research creation process. If you believe we are biased or not doing our homework, you can call us out on it and it will be there in the record. Our philosophy involves cracking open the research process, and using our readers to eliminate bias and enhance the quality of the work.

On the back end, here’s how we handle this approach with licensees:

  • Licensees may propose paper topics. The topic may be accepted if it is consistent with the Securosis research agenda and goals, but only if it can be covered without bias and will be valuable to the end user community.
  • Analysts produce research according to their own research agendas, and may offer licensing under the same objectivity requirements.
  • The potential licensee will be provided an outline of our research positions and the potential research product so they can determine if it is likely to meet their objectives.
  • Once the licensee agrees, development of the primary research content begins, following the Totally Transparent Research process as outlined above. At this point, there is no money exchanged.
  • Upon completion of the paper, the licensee will receive a release candidate to determine whether the final result still meets their needs.
  • If the content does not meet their needs, the licensee is not required to pay, and the research will be released without licensing or with alternate licensees.
  • Licensees may host and reuse the content for the length of the license (typically one year). This includes placing the content behind a registration process, posting on white paper networks, or translation into other languages. The research will always be hosted at Securosis for free without registration.

Here is the language we currently place in our research project agreements:

Content will be created independently of LICENSEE with no obligations for payment. Once content is complete, LICENSEE will have a 3 day review period to determine if the content meets corporate objectives. If the content is unsuitable, LICENSEE will not be obligated for any payment and Securosis is free to distribute the whitepaper without branding or with alternate licensees, and will not complete any associated webcasts for the declining LICENSEE. Content licensing, webcasts and payment are contingent on the content being acceptable to LICENSEE. This maintains objectivity while limiting the risk to LICENSEE. Securosis maintains all rights to the content and to include Securosis branding in addition to any licensee branding.

Even this process itself is open to criticism. If you have questions or comments, you can email us or comment on the blog.