Friday Summary, March 20th, 2009

Happy Friday! Rich is off with the family today and probably sneaking in some time to play with his new Mac Pro as well. If I know him, at the first opportunity he will be in the garage, soldering iron in hand, making his own 9’ mini-DVI cable to hook up his new monitor. Family, new baby, and cool new hardware mean I have Friday blog duties. But as I just got back from the Source Boston show, there is much to talk about this week. Across the board, the presentations at Source were really excellent, and some of the finest minds in security were in attendance, so Stacy Thayer and her team get very high marks from me for putting on a great event. Starting out with a bang, Peter Kuper gave a knockout keynote presentation on the state of financial markets and venture funding for startups. A no-nonsense, no-spin, honest look at where we are today was both a little scary and refreshing for its honesty. He has a post here if you want to read more of his work. David Mortman kicked off the morning sessions with I Can Haz Privacy, updating us on a lot of the privacy issues and legislation going on today. He highlighted the natural link between personal privacy and LOLCATS like no one else, and kept audience participation high by rewarding questions with some awesome homemade wheat bread. The always thought-provoking Adam Shostack gave a presentation on The Crisis in Information Security. I am in complete agreement that despite the hype, breached businesses will continue to function and operate as they always have, and the sky is not falling. And as always, his points are backed by solid research. Even if individual companies generally do not fall, I do still wonder about broader risk to the entire credit card system given its ease of (mis)use, its poor authentication, the millions of stolen credit card numbers floating around, and demonstrated capabilities to automate fraud. Hoff had his best presentation yet with The Frogs Who Desired a King. While you may or may not be interested in security or cloud computing, this is a must-see presentation. Even if you have been reading his Rational Survivability blog posts on the subject, the clarity of the vision he presented regarding the various embodiments of cloud computing and the security challenges of each is more than compelling, and he has backed it up with a staggering amount of research. I’ve got to say, Chris has raised the bar for all of us in the security field for the quality of our presentations. After almost missing the show because of a number of issues on the home front, including spending 4 days at the emergency vet clinic as someone accidentally poisoned one of my dogs, I got on the plane and I am glad I made it. I gave a presentation on Data Breaches and Encryption, examining where encryption technologies help and, just as importantly, where they don’t. My personal “Shock and Awe” award went to Mr. James Atkinson of Granite Island Group TSCM for his presentation on “Horseless Carriage Exploits and Eavesdropping Defenses”. I had no idea that all of these devices were in full effect in most automobiles today, nor that it was this easy to do. Having now given it some thought, though, I think I may have run into some of the devices he discussed. I will be looking through my car this weekend. It was good to see Dennis Fisher again … and he is just launching a new security news network called Threatpost. This effort is sponsored by Kaspersky and they have started off with a ton of stuff, so it’s worth checking out. Now I am off to try and enjoy the weekend, so here it is- the week in review: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences: Rich and Adrian presented Building a Business Justification for Data Security through SANS. We co-presented with Chris Parkerson of McAfee … and apologies to Chris as Rich and I ran a little long. Adrian chatted with Amrit Williams on the subject of Information Centric Security on the Beyond The Perimeter podcast this week. It should be posted soon. Adrian presented Data Breaches and Encryption last week during the Source Boston event. Rich joined Martin McKeay on the Network Security Podcast this week, talking about Google behavioral ad targeting, Comcast passwords exposed, and the new DNS trojan. They were joined by Bill Brenner of CSO Online so you’ll want to check this one out! Favorite Securosis Posts: Rich: Adrian’s post on Immutable Log Files. Adrian: My post on Sprint Data Leak… I try not to post on breaches as there are so many, but this has been so bad for so long that I could not help myself. Favorite Outside Posts: Adrian: Rafal’s post on the Fox News Fail … not for the original post, but the dialog afterwards. Rich: Sure, we’re suckers for a plug, but Jeremiah posts a good list of recent web security related topics. Top News and Posts: Comcast usernames and passwords leaked. Oracle releases multiple Linux security patches. Wikileak exposes Blacklist The PCI compliance shell game …. compliant with the standard right up until the nano-second after they were breached. Blog Comment of the Week: From Ariel at CoreSecurity … Actually, Kelsey reinvented an idea that was previously exposed and published by Futoransky and Kargieman from Core ([1]) and implemented in the msyslog package ([2]) since 1996. I learn something new every day! Now, if so many great security minds think this is a good idea, why does no one want this technology? 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.