Securosis

Research

From Monitoring To Prevention: Switching To Debix

Credit monitoring services, especially those from the credit agencies themselves, leave a bad taste in my mouth. I find it unconscionable that I need to pay to gain access to personal information on me that affects my life at the deepest levels. In our modern society, a good credit rating is as important for our future safety and stability (and sex, to be honest) as a sharp spear and 20/10 vision were to early man. It sucks, but money makes the world go round and we can’t feed Maslow without it (nor can most of us afford homes without good credit). I started using credit monitoring services long before identity theft was a big issue. Back then, reports were never free and credit scores weren’t in as wide use. I wasn’t paranoid or prescient, I’d just managed to screw my credit up so badly in college that I wanted to know exactly what I needed to clean up. It would probably still be screwed up if it weren’t for online banking; I’m really bad about using the mail. When free reports were mandated by the government I kept with the monitoring service for two reasons- to gain access to my credit score, and for identity theft monitoring. And monitoring is not protection- I may be able to detect new activity on my credit report within 1-3 days, but by that time the damage might be done. Along comes Debix. The government has mandated that credit services allow consumers to place “locks” on their reports. No, this won’t stop the bank from reporting you as late, but it does mean they can’t open a new account tied to your record without explicit permission. Being a bunch of wimps beholden to big money, the government only mandated they lock (place a “fraud alert” on) your record for 90 days. For the same price (or less) as credit monitoring, Debix will place a lock on your record and renew it automatically every 90 days. They link the lock to their call center, and when a creditor calls to verify that you really want to open the account the call center routes it to up to three numbers you provide. This has the added advantage of keeping your phone number off your record. (Full disclosure: I was given a free preview, so I didn’t pay for the service. But it’s cheaper than the credit monitoring service I’m dropping). Pretty cool- kind of like anti-exploitation for identity theft. They also insure you and provide a few other features. They are a direct competitor of LifeLock, but LifeLock’s been in the news a bunch here in Phoenix for some… irregularities… that make me uncomfortable with the company. I do like seeing inquiries on my credit report, but I can get that for free on a quarterly basis rather than needing it instantly. Debix is $4/month cheaper than my monitoring was, and blocks unwanted activity. I like that. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Credit Card Fraud Is Not Identity Theft

I just posted on switching to Debix, and it reminded me there’s something I keep forgetting to cover. When reading the news, both mainstream and industry, I’m appalled at the abuse of the term “identity theft”. And don’t get me started on vendor marketing materials. Identity theft is a serious crime with potentially severe repercussions for the victim. It’s when a bad guy uses your personal information, often including Social Security Number, to use your identity for nefarious purposes. It’s most often financial, taking out new credit (which never gets paid), but can include fake ID cards (and thus driving/criminal records), passports, and more. Yes folks, there are bad guys with stolen IDs who get caught by the cops, use the fake ID, get bail, and run for it- leaving you with a nice bench warrant out in your name (really rare, but it happens). A former co-worker once applied for a new mortgage and the bank asked him about the one in default. Oops. That’s identity theft. (BTW- this is a problem far more endemic in the US than most other nations. They don’t rely on a single, not-secret-secret-number (SSN) to manage credit, making ID theft more difficult). Credit card fraud is serious, but not nearly as serious. That’s when someone steals your credit card number and uses it to make fraudulent purchases. Nearly every credit card in the world (but not debit cards- for those you need to check with your bank) includes fraud protection. You, the consumer, are not liable for the fraud if you identify and report the erroneous charges. You don’t bear the costs of getting a new card if you need one. Merchants and banks (but not the credit card companies, of course) bear the costs of credit card fraud, not you. That’s why I don’t care that my wife shops at TJX- we know to monitor our bills and if something happens we won’t be liable. Both are crimes, but in protecting yourself it’s important to understand the difference. As a business I worry quite a bit about credit card fraud since I could bear the cost (if I accepted credit cards). As a consumer I worry more about ID theft. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Second Major Privacy Breach At Sears: Very Bad Logical Flaw

Sears isn’t having much luck these days. First, they install spyware on their customers’ computers. If you “join the Sears community”, they install a proxy on your computer and intercept all web traffic. Ugly, ugly, idiocy. Now, it turns out they have a major logic flaw on their website. As reported by Brian Krebs at Security Fix, anyone can see anyone else’s purchase history with just their name, address, and phone number. Have those white pages handy? It seems to cover both online and offline purchases. If you’re not paying attention to logic flaws in your databases and applications, this is a great example. While it’s good to make life easy for your customers, it’s bad when you make it easy for your next door neighbor to figure out if you really bought those new hedging shears that coincidentally look just like the ones they lost out of their shed last month. This exploit was easily preventable with just a modicum of thought and the most cursory security review. Sears is too big a company to make this kind of mistake. And the spyware? Sheer stupidity by someone in marketing is my guess. Maybe they and whoever screwed up at Sony BMG went to the same marketing school. 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.