Securosis

Menu

Research

SDLC and Entropy

Adrian Lane May 2, 2011 2 Comments

I really enjoy having Gunnar Peterson on the team. Seems like every time we talk in our staff meeting I laugh and learn something – two rare outcomes in this profession. We were having a laugh Friday morning about the tendencies of software development organizations to trip over themselves in order to improve. Several different clients were having the same problem in understanding how to apply security to code development. Part of our discussion: Gunnar: There are no marketing requirements, so no code, right? Adrian: I’ll bet the developers are furiously coding as we speak. No MRD, no problem. Gunnar: The Product Manager said “You start coding, I’ll go find out what the customer wants.” Adrian: Ironic that what they’re doing is technically Agile. Maybe if it’s a Rapid Prototyping team I’d have some sympathy, but someone’s expecting production code. Gunnar: I wonder what they think they are building? Don’t talk to me about improving Waterfall or Agile when you can’t get your organizational $&!% together. What do I mean by that? Here is an example of something I witnessed: Phase 1: Development VP, during an employee review, says, “What the heck have you been doing the last six months?” In a panic, developer mentions a half-baked idea he had, and a prototype widget he’s been working on. An informal demo is scheduled. Phase 2: VP says “I love that! That is the coolest thing I have seen in a long time”. The developer’s chest swells with pride. Phase 3: VP says “Let’s put that in the next release”. The developer’s brain freezes, thinking about the engineering challenges of turing a half-baked widget into production code, suddenly realizing there is no time to do any other sprint tasks. The VP takes the developer’s stunned silence as a commitment and walks away. Phase 4: Developer says to product manager “Yeah, we’re including XYZ widget. The VP asked for it so I checked it into the code base”. Product Manager says “Are you effing crazy? We don’t even have tests for it”. And they make it happen because, after all, it’s employee review time. It’s not news to many of you, but that’s how features get put in, and then you ‘fix’ the feature. Security plays catch-up somewhere down the road because the feature is too awesome to not put in, and to wait until it’s fully sussed out. I used to think this was a process issue, but now I believe it’s a byproduct of human nature. Managers don’t realize the subtle ways they change others’ behavior, and their own excitement over new technology pushes rules right out the window. It’s less about changing the process than not blowing up the one you have. Gunnar’s take is a little different: If you’re in security, don’t assume that you can change process and don’t assume your job is to make process more formal. Instead look at concrete ways to reduce vulnerabilities in the context of the existing process. As any teenage girl knows, don’t listen to a word the boy says – watch what he actually does. Likewise, security people working on SDLC, don’t believe the process documents! Instead observe developers in the wild – sit in their cubes and watch what they actually do. If you strip away the PowerPoints, process documents, and grand unified dreams of software development (be they Agile, Scrum, or Rational) this is how real world software development occurs. It’s a chaotic and messy process. This assumption leads you in a different direction – not formalism, but winning the hearts and minds of developers who will deliver on building the security mechanisms, and finding quick and dirty ways to improve security. 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.