Securosis

Menu

Research

Friday Summary: February 3, 2012

Adrian Lane February 2, 2012 No Comments

Since Rich is vacationing working hard at a security conference in Mexico, I figure I would write this week’s Friday Summary. I am pretty jazzed about some upcoming white papers I’ll be writing on securing data and applications at scale, understanding and selecting masking technologies, and why log management is not dead! And I am having a good time researching and writing the DAM 2.0 DSP series as well. I originally intended to write about our research agenda but changed my mind. Frankly, I have spring fever. Spring fever, you ask, in the first week of February? Yep. It’s 74 degrees here and sunny. WTF? Punxsutawney Phil weighed in with his opinion, and after burning his retinas, it looks like we are going to have another six weeks of winter. I sure hope so! Another six weeks of this type of weather would be awesome. I have been on the phone with dozens of people around the country, from Boston to San Diego, and they are all experiencing fantastic weather. Even Gunnar reports highs of 48 degrees in Minnesota. I guess the cold air jet stream has been staying north of the border. For me this means my peach trees are blooming. Blooming! On freakin’ January 30th! See for yourself: And I know some of you may not care, but the warm weather means my backyard garden is almost complete. Following up on my post last October, in just a couple short months the Vegetable Fortress is built! Overbuilt? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I may put some solar powered laser turrets on it. You never know when Al-Qaeda might train gophers with tig welders to attack my squash. And if the DHS threat level spikes I will have a detachment of Araucana commando chickens to beat back the attack. The price of vegetables is eternal vigilance – and $3.95 for GMO free seeds. Now call in sick and go outside to enjoy the nice weather! You’ll be glad you did. On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences Our Research Page with every freakin’ white paper we’ve done in the last three years. Rich, Adrian, and Shimmy discuss NoSQL Security with Couchbase and Mongo founders. Other Securosis Posts Bridging the Mobile Security Gap: Operational Consistency. Malware Analysis Quant: Take the Survey (and win fancy prizes!) Incite 2/1/2012: Bored to Tears. Implementing DLP: Integration, Part 1. Understanding and Selecting Database Security Platforms. Bridging the Mobile Security Gap: The Need for Context. Implementing and Managing a Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Solution: Index of Posts. Implementing DLP: Final Deployment Preparations. Malware Analysis Quant: Phase 1 – The Process [Check out the paper!] Favorite Outside Posts Mike Rothman: Mr. Waledac: The Peter North of Spamming. Krebs could have written this post in Swahili and it would still be my favorite outside link. Anyone that can pull off a Peter North mention in the title of a post gets my weekly vote. And it’s even a good post! Krebs digs into the intrigue of the Russian Spam Mafia. David Mortman: BSides/RSA Conference Dust Up. And the resolution. Beneficial discussion. Rich: Firewalls and SSL: More Profitable than Facebook. Gunnar’s got a great point: Firewalls, AV, and SSL sell – and very little money gets spent on innovative products. Adrian Lane: Fascinating look at Netflix’s Ephemeral Volatile Caching in the cloud. Not security related, but a good presentation of what’s possible with cloud content distribution. Project Quant Posts Malware Analysis Quant: Monitoring for Reinfection. Malware Analysis Quant: Remediate. Malware Analysis Quant: Find Infected Devices. Malware Analysis Quant: Defining Rules. Malware Analysis Quant: The Malware Profile. Malware Analysis Quant: Dynamic Analysis. Malware Analysis Quant: Static Analysis. Malware Analysis Quant: Build Testbed. Research Reports and Presentations Tokenization Guidance Analysis: Jan 2012. Applied Network Security Analysis: Moving from Data to Information. Tokenization Guidance. Security Management 2.0: Time to Replace Your SIEM? Fact-Based Network Security: Metrics and the Pursuit of Prioritization. Tokenization vs. Encryption: Options for Compliance. Security Benchmarking: Going Beyond Metrics. Top News and Posts Paget Demonstrates Wireless Credit Card Theft. Carrier IQ Concerns. WPA2 Vulnerability Analysis. Symantec patches pcAnywhere, says it’s safe. Secure Virtual Storage – the AWS way. Missed this in last week’s summary. Low Orbit Ion Cannon DDoS Analysis. Not new, but newsworthy. Android Malware Infection. Android can be a more powerful platform as you can run more powerful apps on it. This is made possible by a lax security model. That’s the tradeoff. Google to Censor Blogger Blogs on a ‘Per Country Basis’. The tradeoff is either Google blogs get banned on a ‘Per Country Basis’ or Google bans select blogs. Revenue trumps ethics every time. Blog Comment of the Week None 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.