Securosis

Menu

Research

RSA: the Only Difference Between a Rut and a Grave Is the Depth

Melissa February 16, 2011 1 Comment

I think Rich may still be sleep deprived, but on the upside his recap did elicit my loudest laugh of the day. See if you can spot the sentence that caused it. Rich’s Recap I wish I had something witty and insightful to say about the first full day of RSA, but that would involve actually seeing more of the show than my own presentations and the insides of meeting rooms. And while it’s technically the first day of the conference, it’s my third day of entirely too much talking and walking. So here are a few crib notes. Started the day by noticing I was supposed to record a video for a presentation I hadn’t written yet. Resolved post-breakfast-meeting thanks to a convenient coffee shop. Good thing it was on EDRM… not like anyone is using it anyway. I really am starting to see some interesting cloud-specific security tools floating around out there. Yes, there are a bunch of companies that just converted their existing software into virtual appliances, but the ones building from the ground up for cloud are showing some nice innovation. Serious improvement over last year. Gave my DLP talk today. I’ve stared at the same damn DLP slides for so many years now that I just couldn’t bring myself to look at them again. So I shut them off and went commando. I may have freaked some people out. One dude was writing bullet points on a pad and holding them in front of his face. Seems like most people liked it. Maybe. That’s what I’ll tell myself as I try to fall asleep tonight. Had a cloud panel with the worst freaking title in history. Something like “Public and private sectors: why are agencies hesitant to adopt the cloud?” No, seriously, I’m not making this *&%^ up. I figured 2 people might show up, but the room was full and the panel went well. Turns out we had the CISO of eBay, a senior legal counsel for security and privacy at GE, a muckety-muck from NIST, and the CSO of Qualys. Tons of audience questions, many around all the sticky issues of using cloud with some semblance of control. Guess what folks – if you have developers with corporate credit cards, you’re in the cloud. Show floor is full of blinky lights. Loud dudes in suits talking. Free cars. Seriously. I guess security is big business. All this work junk is seriously impeding my ability to consume vast amounts of frothy beverages. Early bed tonight, mostly due to losing my voice and still having 3 presentations to go. –Rich Did you catch it? If not, here it is. A quote that shall live on in infamy (at least if I have anything to do with it): “So I shut them off and went commando. I may have freaked some people out.” I’d say that’s a safe assumption, Rich. Next up we have The Old Man, aka Mike Here are my observations from today: I’m getting old: There was a time I could drink all night and be productive during the day. But those days have passed. It’s getting harder to ramp up my partying, knowing I have a number of panels and even more meetings tomorrow. Yes, I’m old. And the blue-haired booth babes that a nobody vendor had in their booth annoyed me. What the hell? Get off my lawn! RSA is not the real world: I had a conversation with a bunch of investors and needed to remind them that the messaging and solutions pushed at us at RSA are not reflective of the real needs of the market. Not even close. But in the reality distortion field of the Moscone Center it’s easy to forget that most companies don’t even know how many devices they have. Shamans and snake oil salesmen: We don’t make decisions based on data, but generally through a leap of faith. Do you know if your IPS or AV really works? If you said either yes or no, you are wrong. You have no idea. You may have a hunch, but you don’t have the data to actually know. So anything you buy to address an issue is a leap of faith. If you can grok the philosophy of whoever is selling you stuff, then they are shamans. But those are few and far between. Unfortunately most are charlatans selling snake oil backed by ridiculous promises and hyperbole that prey upon the suckers born every minute. And there are plenty of them. This industry sucks at marketing: In tooling around the show floor, I realized the entire industry can’t market worth a crap. Nonstop technical jargon, with stupid parlor tricks like magicians, booth babes, and smoothies focused on standing out from the crowd. How about trying this on for size? Tell customers what you do in simple, problem oriented terms. Nobody gives a shit about the size of your widget or your blinky lights. Other random thoughts: I really shouldn’t be around people for a week straight. Thankfully I’m unarmed. If you are going to drink to excess, STFU before you say something stupid. Folks who can bust your stuff don’t need to tell you that – those who need to boast can look forward to reading their email spool on a torrent. I also decided that if we ever have a SecurosisCon, I will give a keynote in an Elvis suit. And on that note, I’d better go to sleep before someone gets hurt. –Mike That’s right. Stay out of Mike’s way or he will run you down with his walker. Let’s just hope he doesn’t throw out his hip. Again. 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.