RSA Conference 2012 Guide: Email & Web Security

For a little bonus on a Sunday afternoon, let’s dig into the next section of the RSA Guide, Email and Web Security which remains a pretty hot area. This shouldn’t be surprising since these devices tend to be one of the only defenses against your typical attacks like phishing and drive-by downloads. We’ve decided to no longer call this market ‘content security’; that was a terrible name. Email and Web Security speaks to both the threat models as well as the deployment architectures of what started as the ‘email security gateway’ market. These devices screen email and web traffic moving in and out of your company at the application layer. The goal is to prevent unwanted garbage like malware from coming into your network, as well as detection of unwanted activity like employees clogging up the network with HiDef downloads of ‘Game of Thrones’. These gateways have evolved to include all sorts of network and content analysis tools for a variety of traffic types (not just restricted to web traffic). Some of the vendors are starting to resemble UTM gateways, placing 50 features all on the same box, and letting the user decide what they want from the security feature buffet. Most vendors offer a hybrid model of SaaS and in-house appliances for flexible deployments while keeping costs down. This is a fully mature and saturated market, with the leading vendors on a very even footing. There are several quality products out there, each having a specific strength in their technology, deployment or pricing model. There are quite a few areas of interest at the show for web gateway security: VPN Security and the Cloud Remember how VPN support was a major requirement for every email security appliance? Yeah, well, it’s back. And it’s new and cloudified! Most companies provide their workforce with secure VPN connections to work from home or on the road. And most companies find themselves supporting more remote users more often than ever, which we touched on in the Endpoint Security section. As demand grows so too does the need for better, faster VPN services. Leveraging cloud services these gateways route users through a cloud portal, where user identification and content screening occur, then passing user requests into your network. The advantages are you get scalable cloud bandwidth, better connectivity, and security screening before stuff hits your network. More (poor man’s) DLP Yes, these secure web offerings provide Data Loss Prevention ‘lite’. In most cases, it’s just the subset of DLP needed to detect data exfiltration. And regular expression checking for outbound documents and web requests is good enough to address the majority of content leakage problems, so this works well enough for most customers, which makes it one of the core features every vendor must have. While it’s difficult for any one vendor to differentiate their offering by having DLP-lite, but they’ll have trouble competing in the marketplace without it. It’s an effective tool for select data security problems. Global Threat Intelligence Global threat intelligence involves a security vendor collecting attack data from all their customers, isolating new attacks that impact a handful, and automatically applying security responses to their other client installations. When implemented correctly, it’s effective at slowing down the propagation of threats across many sites. The idea has been around for a couple years, originating in the anti-spam business, but has begun to show genuine value for some firewall, web content and DAST (dynamic application security testing) products. Alas, like many features, some are little more than marketing ‘check the box’ functionality here while others actually collect data from all their clients and promptly distribute anonymized intelligence back to the rest of their customers to ensure they don’t get hammered. It’s difficult to discern one from the other, so you’ll need to dig into the product capabilities. Though it should be fun on the show floor to force an SE or other sales hack to try to explain exactly how the intelligence network works. Anti-malware Malware is the new ‘bad actor’. It’s the 2012 version of the Trojan Horse; something of a catch-all for viruses, botnets, targeted phishing attacks, keystroke loggers and marketing spyware. It infects servers and endpoints by any and all avenues available. And just as the term malware covers a lot of different threats, vendor solutions are equally vague. Do they detect botnet command and control, do they provide your firewall with updated ‘global intelligence’, or do they detect phishing email? Whatever the term really means, you’re going to hear a lot about anti-malware and why you must stop it. Though we do see innovation on network-based malware detection, which we covered in the Network Security section. New Anti-Spam. Same as the old Anti-Spam We thought we were long past the anti-spam discussion, isn’t that problem solved already? Apparently not. Spam still exists, that’s for sure, but any given vendor’s efficiency varies from 98% to 99.9% effective on any given week. Just ask them. Being firm believers in Mr. Market, clearly there is enough of an opportunity to displace incumbents, as we’ve seen a couple new vendors emerge to provide new solutions, and established vendors to blend their detection techniques to improve effectiveness. There is a lot of money spent specifically for spam protection, and it’s a visceral issue that remains high profile when it breaks, thus it’s easy to get budget for. Couple that with some public breaches from targeted phishing attacks or malware infections through email (see above), and anti-spam takes on a new focus. Again. We don’t think this is going to alter anyone’s buying decisions, but we wanted to make sure you knew what the fuss was about, and not to be surprised when you think you stepped into RSA 2005 seeing folks spouting about new anti-spam solutions. Share:

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.