RSA: We Now Go Live to Our Reporters on the Scene

It’s worth noting that even sleep-deprived Rich is surprisingly coherent. Rich While the RSA show technically doesn’t start until tomorrow, there’s still a heck of a lot going on. For myself, the worst is actually over. And by “the worst”, I mean there are even odds I will actually sleep tonight. It all started yesterday when we delivered the very first CCSK certification class for the Cloud Security Alliance. I learned three things in the process: Managing other analysts on a project sucks major @$$. We totally need 2 days to cover this content. Heck, with our current slide deck we could easily fill 3-4 days. Running 5 power strips to tables in the Moscone center costs $2,100. Most of that was $157/hr for the box to plug the power strips into. The room only cost $6K for the day. Methinks I have never been so violated in my life. The class went well and we learned a heck of a lot. We still have a ton of work to tune the content and package it, but it was awesome to spend a full day teaching folks and getting feedback, as opposed to the usual analyst stuff. I’m starting to think this “cloud” thing might be big. Today we ran the e10+ program for people with 10+ years in security. I thought we’d delve deeply into technical issues, but they were mostly interested in how to work within their own organizations and prioritize security. To be honest I’m far more comfortable with the pure tech side of things (despite being an analyst), but I do understand that once you hit a certain point in your career the soft skills are more important. One of my favorite bits from the panel was from Richard Bejtlich. He said one of the ways they determine their priorities is to figure out what the bad guys are looking for. I think I’m going to call this “Attacker Driven Data Classification”. It makes a lot of sense: if the bad guys are looking for something, and it isn’t a high priority for you, at minimum you should figure out why they want it. Other than that things are going well. We started showing off the Securosis Nexus, which we will make public fairly soon. With that, it’s time to go to bed. I have two sessions tomorrow (my big DLP presentation and another on cloud and government), plus way too many meetings. Prepping for RSA is always hard, and I hate being away from my family, but it is kind of nice to catch up with folks and be social once (or twice) a year. –Rich Next up, Adrian What’s new is new. Rich and Mike put together this year’s e10+ seminar at RSA. And like most panels that involve Securosis, there were a couple testy moments when some of the participants took exception to Richard Bejtlich’s assertion that compromised data is exposed to the world in greater quantity – with far more public access to the content – than ever before. Some of the audience members felt we were seeing the same attacks over and over, and the threats of today are no different than we saw in 1985. In fact they went so far as to say “the cloud” was not much more than publicly available mainframes. David Mortman wins a prize for his rebuttal: “Yeah, RACF rules!” All kidding aside, I have been in the industry almost that long, and I can say that in some ways this later assertion is true; we still suck at application security, and DoS, non-repudiation, and spoofing work pretty much the same way they did in 1985. How these attacks occur is new, as they exploit both new and old technologies in interesting ways. But the thrust of Richard’s comment is absolutely correct: The speed and quantity of exfiltration is unprecedented. Further, what’s very new is the ability to widely distribute data and make stolen data available for search and inspection. Ten years ago I could push stolen information to FTP servers and hacker sites, but it data was not really accessible to people who did not know where to look for it, or did not understand how to grep through blobs of multi-format data. Now we have Google to do it for us. So what’s old is new again, but in many cases it’s just freakin’ new. –Adrian And now for something completely different: Mike 1) We need toddlers, not Kenyans. No offense to Kenyans, but one of the things that became crystal clear at the e10+ sessions this morning was the disparity of needs between the early adopters of security technologies and everyone else. You see the vendors and talking heads spend all their time talking about strategies to do advanced security against serious adversaries. But most of the world can’t even do the simple n00b blocking and tackling to defeat script kiddies. So basically most of the RSA Conference will be focused on these advanced strategies, which have very little bearing on the vast majority of organizations. It’s like our industry is hiring Kenyans to run a marathon, while everyone else barely walks. Maybe we need schoolteachers. This capabilities gap might be the most significant issue we face as an industry. Yes, even more than APT or WikiLeaks. Now do two shots, because I said both the buzzword bingo keywords. 2) The perimeter is dead. Long live the perimeter: Besides the fireworks of Cisco and Palo Alto screaming at each other during my panel at the America’s Growth Capital conference, we covered some important ground. First off, the perimeter is not dead. But it needs to get a lot smarter and much more distributed. As more stuff moves to the cloud and video clogs our networks, we need to gain visibility and control, working the areas we know we can access. That means applications. The other resonating point was the reality that with the massive bandwidth consumed by video, we need to provide

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.