Securosis

Menu

Research

Friday Summary: June 3, 2011

Adrian Lane June 3, 2011 2 Comments

Speaking as someone who had to wipe several computers and reinstall the operating system because the Sony/BMG rootkit disabled the DVD drive, I need to say I am deriving some satisfaction from this: Lulzsec has hit Sony. Again. For like the, what, 10th incident in the last couple months? I’m not an anarchist and I am not cool with the vast majority of espionage, credit card fraud, hacking, and defacement that goes on. I pretty consistently come down on the other side of the fence on all that stuff. In fact I spend most of my time trying to teach people how to protect themselves from those intrusions. But just this once – and I am not too proud to admit it – I have this total case of schadenfreude going. And not just because Sony intentionally wrote and distributed malware to their customers – it’s for all the bad business practices they have engaged in. Like trying to stop the secondary market from reselling video games. It’s for spending huge amounts of engineering efforts to discourage customers from customizing PlayStations. It’s for watermarking that deteriorated video and audio quality. It’s for the CD: not the CD medium co-developed with Phillips, but telling us it sounded better than anything else. It’s for telling us Trinitron was better – and charging more for it – when it offered inferior picture quality. It’s for deteriorating the quality of their products while pushing prices higher. It’s for trying to make ‘ripping’ illegal. Sony has been fabulously successful financially, not by striving to make customers happy, but by identifying lucrative markets and owning them in a monopoly or bust model – think Betamax, Blu-ray, PlayStation, Walkman, etc. So while it may sound harsh, I find it incredibly ironic that a company which tries to control its customer experience to the nth degree has completely lost control of its own systems. It’s wrong, I know, but it’s making me chuckle every time I hear of another breach. Before I forget: Rich and I will be in San Jose all next week for the Cloud Security Alliance Certification course. Things are pretty hectic but I am sure we could meet up at least one night while we are there. Ping us if you are interested! On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences Rich quoted on Lockheed breach. Adrian’s Dark Reading post. Favorite Securosis Posts Mike Rothman: Understanding and Selecting a File Activity Monitoring Solution. Interesting new technology that you need to understand. Read it. Rich: Cloud Security Training: June 8-9 in San Jose. Adrian Lane: A Different Take on the Defense Contractor/RSA Breach Miasma. Other Securosis Posts Incite 6/1/2011: Cherries vs. M&Ms. Tokenization vs. Encryption: Options for Compliance. Friday Summary: May 27, 2011. Favorite Outside Posts Adrian Lane: Botnet Suspect Sought Job at Google. I can only imagine the look on Dmitri’s face when he saw this – innocent or not. Mike Rothman: BoA data leak destroys trust. But at what scale? Are customers rushing for the door because their bank was breached? Since there are no numbers people just assume they do. As a contrarian, that’s a bad assumption. Rich Mogull: Clouds, WAFs, Messaging Buses and API Security… Project Quant Posts DB Quant: Index. NSO Quant: Index of Posts. NSO Quant: Health Metrics–Device Health. NSO Quant: Manage Metrics–Monitor Issues/Tune IDS/IPS. Research Reports and Presentations Understanding and Selecting a File Activity Monitoring Solution. Database Activity Monitoring: Software vs. Appliance. React Faster and Better: New Approaches for Advanced Incident Response. Measuring and Optimizing Database Security Operations (DBQuant). Network Security in the Age of Any Computing. Top News and Posts ElcomSoft Breaks iOS 4 Encryption. An Anatomy of a Boy in the Browser Attack. Usually, stay away from vendor blogs, but Imperva has had some good posts lately. Lulzsec has hit Sony. Again. For the, what, 5th10th breach in the last couple months? PBS Totally Hosed by Lulzsec. They got just about every single database. Ouch. Where do they find the time to post funny Tupac articles? Apple Malware Patch Defeated And by the time you read this there will probably be a new patch for the old patch. Apple Malware Patch. Android Users Get Malware. It’s a feature. Gmail Users Compromised. No favorite comment this week. 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.