Securosis

Menu

Research

Bringing Sexy back (to Security): Mike’s RSAC 2012 Wrap-up

Mike Rothman March 5, 2012 No Comments

Oh yeah. I’m back in the ATL after a week at the RSA Conference. Aside from severe sleep deprivation, major liver damage, and some con flu… I’m feeling great. It seems everyone else is as well. Something appeared at RSA that we haven’t seen for at least 3 years: smiles. Which I guess is to be expected, since in 2009 and 2010 everyone walked around with hard hats, expecting the sky to fall. In 2011 there were some positive signs but still a lot of skepticism, which was gone this year. Almost everyone I talked to was very optimistic for 2012 and beyond. As a contrarian, my first instinct was that we must be breathing our own exhaust. You point to two other guys and they say they are optimistic, and then it becomes the perception of optimism, rather than optimism you can pay your mortgage with. But even when challenged, everyone felt pretty good. Even the tools felt sexy. It didn’t help their hygiene much, but you can’t expect the world to change overnight, can you? But to be clear, the idea of Bringing Sexy back (to Security) is not mine. But someone said it to me when I was in a drunken haze. I thought it was Rich, but he wouldn’t acknowledge it. So if you were the one who said it to me, thanks. It’s a great assessment of where we are at, after years in the compliance-driven darkness. Pendulum Swinging back to Security Speaking of compliance, overt messaging around our least-favorite C word was pretty muted at the show this year. PCI is old news. HiTech enforcement is an unknown quantity, and for the most part unless an organization has been sleeping for the past 7 years they should be in decent shape regarding the low bar that a compliance mandate represents. Now actually securing something? That’s entirely different, and as such, the pendulum clearly swung back toward more of a security message on the floor this year. Which should warm the hearts of all you security folks nauseated at the game we have had to play to get our security projects paid for out of the compliance budget. So when you do next year’s holiday cards, send one to the Red Army and probably Anonymous. By then you’d expect both organizations to be Doxed, so you may even have an address. And they both probably own the USPS, so they can get their own mail as well, if they care to… Kidding aside, between high profile targeted attacks and chaotic actors, it is now clear to most organizations that PCI isn’t good enough. And that means we need to start talking about security again. Also be thankful that we’ve seen innovation in perimeter security gear (think NGFW), as well. Given the number of depreciated firewalls awaiting something interesting to drive a perimeter security renewal/re-architecture, having NGFW gear reach stability created a wave of buying that has also driven many of the public security companies. Those that HP and IBM haven’t overpaid for yet, anyway. Honestly, it was great to actually talk security this week, and not weird funding strategies. Really great. BigData Hype did not disappoint As we highlighted in the RSA Guide 2012, it has been obvious that BigData would be a big theme at the show. And it was. I ran into Joe Yeager from Lancope on my flight home and he joked to me that we should sell Powered by Hadoop stickers for $20K each. Given that every company needs to jump onto the BigData bandwagon, Joe is exactly right. Those would fly off the shelf. Apparently the marketers still haven’t figured out the difference between BigData and a lot of data, but that’s okay. Hyperbole rules the trade show floor (and some booth babes shaking their things), so it’s all good. But I suspect we’ll be seeing a lot of BigData at security conferences for the foreseeable future. Cloud still prominent It was also all cloud, all the time, at RSA this year. Again, not a surprise and probably justified. Though there was a lot more SECaaS (SECurity as a Service), than actual cloud security. I’m sure Rich will want to expand on this a bit at some point, but we saw plenty of folks talking about encrypting data in the cloud, along with lots of focus on managing cloud instances and the security of those instances. And all that is great to see. Real innovation is happening in this space, and not a second too soon – folks are doing this cloud thing, and we need to figure out how to protect that stuff. Yes, we saw a bunch of cloud washing, especially from the network security folks, who made a big deal about their VM instances that can run in the cloud. After hearing for years about how their hardware prowess makes their boxes great, it was kind of funny to hear them talk about how their stuff runs great in the cloud, but whatever. It’s a bandwagon and RSA requires you to jump aboard or get left behind. Good vibrations on BYOD The other area that we expected to hear a lot about was mobile security, specifically this BYOD stuff. At the e10+ session on Monday morning we did an entire section on BYOD and it spurred a great discussion. Here are some takeaways: iOS is cool, Android is not, and BlackBerry is dead: That’s not to say BlackBerry is gone, but it’s just a matter of time, as almost everyone in the room was migrating to another platform. It’s also not that Android isn’t showing up on corporate networks – it is, but with caveats. We’ll get to that. iOS is generally accepted as okay, mostly because of the way the App Store screens applications prior to availability. Everyone has policies. Most are not enforced. We spent a good portion of the session talking about policies, and everyone agreed that documenting policies is critical. Though enforcement of these policies is clearly lagging, especially for senior folks. But any employee seems to know

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.