Securosis

Menu

Research

There’s Always a Double Standard

Rich October 9, 2008 1 Comment

I don’t remember the exact quote from King of the Hill (an animated series here in the US), but it went something like this. Bobby: But how come you don’t want Luanne to go out with guys but you want me to date girls? Dad: It’s called the double standard, Bobby. Don’t knock it – we got the long end of the stick on that one. Alan Shimel clearly got the short end of the stick when his account was hacked. Heck, he got the short end of the nub, and so would pretty much all of us. Odds are high you’ve heard that the college kid that hacked Palin’s account is being indicted and could face jail time. Twitter was all aflutter yesterday with concerns that the potential punishment exceeds the crime. Personally, I believe if you break the law, you face the consequences. I also harbor no illusions that our justice system is blind. It’s clear if you mess with a popular politician, they will frack you as hard as possible, in every way possible Then bury you. Then pee on your grave. Then pee on your dog before they bury it next to you. Your family and friends? You really don’t want to think about that. And when you mess with a maverick Republican? Well, let’s better hope they can’t track down anyone that ever bothered to smile in your general direction. Had the perpetrator broke into a government account I would expect a different set of consequences. But a personal account should be treated the same as Joe Six Pack’s. Heck, Alan’s break in involved documented financial fraud, unlike Palin. Not that I think we should destroy the lives of every college kid that virtually shoplifts a virtual candy bar (punishment should suit the crime), but over-tolerance only breeds contempt. Just call me a dreamer, but as a realist I know I’m just wasting my words on this particular topic. Still, I’ve heard from businesses that unless credit cards or other hard financial losses are clearly involved it is essentially impossible to get law enforcement to take action; they just don’t have the resources. As such we need to focus on our own monitoring and incident response. If you can’t prove someone really stole your cash, you won’t get the attention of law enforcement. If you can’t give them a description, don’t expect the case to go very far. It’s really no different in the physical world. A few years ago, when I moved to Phoenix, we screwed up and left the garage door open at night. One of those silly mistakes when you think the other person took care of it. Neighborhoods are routinely cruised out here, and when I woke up and noticed it was too late. There went my road bicycle, most of my climbing gear, and, worst of all, a small pack containing my original Star Wars figures I’d saved since I was a kid and some other very personal mementos. We filled out a police report but never expected any action (no, they won’t take fingerprints if someone steals your bike), and after our deductible it wasn’t even worth filing an insurance claim. I made the rounds of the local pawn shops, but no joy. Society accepts a certain level of losses, since we don’t have the resources to continue otherwise. That doesn’t, of course, apply when something gets the press attention of the Palin hack. Sometimes it’s about the losses, and other times it’s about looking good in the press. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Mail Goggles

Adrian Lane October 9, 2008 No Comments

Someone at Google has created Mail Goggles. It’s a little Gmail utility to keep you from sending out email while, uh, under the influence. Jon Perlow, the author, had this to say … [snip] “Sometimes I send messages I shouldn’t send. Like the time I told that girl I had a crush on her over text message. Or the time I sent that late night e-mail to my ex-girlfriend that we should get back together,” [/snip] And who hasn’t, really? It’s no wonder I am not smart enough to work at Google. I would never have through this up, never mind actually coding it. I checked, and it’s really there, under the Lab’s section, along with a dozen or so other productivity tools. I really think they could be onto something here … just consider this from a ‘Reputational Risk’ perspective; this could be a hot product for Postini. One too many Martini’s with lunch? Drowning your sorrows as you watch your stock portfolio plunge? A little testy that your “spa day” executive retreat was cancelled? No problem, Google will quarantine your outbound email! And if your too drunk to remember to turn this off, your email probably should be sequestered. Hoff was right, Google really is becoming a security company. Now, where did I leave that glass of bourbon … Share:

Share:
Read Post
dinosaur-sidebar

Research

view all

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

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.