Securosis

Research

There Are No Trusted Sites: Paris Hilton Edition

While not on the scale of Amex or BusinessWeek, I just find this one amusing. Paris Hilton’s official website was hacked and is serving up a trojan (the malware kind, not what you’d expect from her*). From Network World: The hack was discovered by security vendor ScanSafe, which said that Parishilton.com (note: this site is not safe to visit as of press time) had apparently been compromised since Friday. Visitors to the site are presented with a pop-up window urging them to download software in order to enhance their viewing of the site. Whether they click “yes” or “no” on this window, the site then tries to download a malicious program, known as Trojan-Spy.Zbot.YETH, from another Web site. The best part? Only 12 of 37 tested AV vendors catch the trojan. All of you that give me crap for hammering on AV can go away now. sorry, couldn’t help myself there. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Phil Collins is the Mel Torme of my generation

This post is deeply off topic, has nothing to do with security, and everything to do with my personal realizations about music. My calendar says that it is 2009. My radio says it is 1978. The radio must be right because I just listened to ‘Warewolves of London’ each and every day for the last three days. It’s just weird, because I like music, but I am also getting tired of itl. I like to have the radio in the background pretty much all the time. I am what is called a ‘Stereophile’ as well. I love music and I love the intricacies of the technology used to reproduce music, so playing with stereo equipment is nirvana for me. When not writing white papers and blogging, I am reading about and listening to my stereo systems. 3 systems in all, plus a radio in the kitchen, car and garage. My musical tastes vary, but tend to listen to rock during the day, jazz/ragtime/blues at night. The latter has been great as I am not saturated with it, and I am constantly finding new stuff that I like (while I am on the subject, James Brown was a bad-ass!). But it’s the rock and roll on the Radio that’s got me really vexed. Why? On the Radio it is 1987. I know this because I have heard ‘Welcome to the Jungle’ each and every day for the last 8 days. Did our brains somehow imprint an image of what music was supposed to be when we were young, and now we cannot move away from that? It never thought as a child that when I became an adult I would be listening to the same music I was listening to at 4, 8, 12, 15, every day, day after day for eternity. Bad when you grow tired of songs you like, awful when you still hear the songs you grew weary of in high school. I always assumed that there would continually be new music that I liked, from the bands that I liked, and the radio stations would progress as the musicians did. Not so! AC/DC and Aerosmith may have the odd hit, most new music flops horribly. Chinese Democracy can’t get half the air time of Appetite for Destruction. Sure, that’s a blessing, but one is new and the other is a tired 22 years old. A couple new bands offer the interesting song or two, but the rock & roll stations continue to play the same music, over and over and over. It appears that every major rock band in the world wrote three songs and the reminder of their recordings were burned so that we could focus all our time and energy on a handful of ‘important’ (re: safe) songs. Oh, listen, it’s Aqualung. Just like yesterday. This is what prompted me to try and diversify from Rock a bit, but with very little success. Old school Hip Hop gets my occasional attention when I run across something like ‘You Be Illin’, but I have never been able to really enjoy Rap. Tried real hard with classical; even accepted the 1200 classical albums to see if my musical tastes somehow ‘matured’ enough to listen to these composers. Boredom forced me to give the collection away to someone who would appreciate it. Country and Western makes me feel like life is not worth living and I want to slash my wrists. There are plenty of popular mexican music stations that are somewhat entertaining, but after a while, especially when you do not understand the words, the same ‘da da da dat dat dah’ accordion bridge grows very fatiguing. So I tune back to one of the 6 rock stations I get here in Phoenix, where it’s 1985, and I am listening to this fresh cut of Sussudio. In my teens I would never have dreamt that Phil Collins would be on the radio, every day, as if he was a first run artist that everyone listed to – with a new top 10 hit every week. But just listen a few minutes and there he is, as if we just loved his stuff. He gets more air time than Kanye West. A competent singer, songwriter & drummer, I really have no problem with Phil Collins. OK to listen to, say, once a month. 4 times a day on the radio makes me want to hurl. And now I know why Phil Collins is the Mel Torme of my generaiton. Good enough to make the favored radio station play list, but if you were a non-fan of the art, you would think this guy is a Louis Armstrong or Mozart-esque musical genius. What can you do? Keep singing along I guess … “Aaahoo, Werewolves of London”. At least I LIKE that song. 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.