Securosis

Menu

Research

Friday Summary: March 16, 2011 (a little late)

Rich March 16, 2012 No Comments

Sorry, folks, I wrote the Summary yesterday and got so caught up in CU beating UNLV for our first NCAA Tournament win in 15 years that I forgot to actually post this. Rich here. I’m going to pull a Rothman this week and go a little personal. I have not only been a competitive athlete my entire life, but most of you have probably noticed that I have a somewhat competitive and achievement-oriented personality overall. Life may not be a video game, but I’m sure going to grab as many power ups as I can just in case. From a certain perspective it’s selfish, because it’s all about what I can achieve, but for me it has always been more about exploring and challenging myself than beating others. I don’t mind losing as long as I played a good game. But I despise losing or doing poorly because I failed to perform. I have tempered a bit with age, but I’m still a competitive SOB. Almost always against the unrealistic goals I set for myself. But earlier this week that all went out the window. My daughter turned 3 recently, which meant it was time for her to move up to the next swimming class. Phoenix is loaded with pools and open water, and childhood drownings are a big problem. We started her in swimming lessons when she was a little over a year old, and for the past 18+ months I have dutifully taken her (and later our younger daughter) to the insanely chlorinated pool where I jumped in, carried her around, and sang all the kiddie songs while she tried to drown herself when I wasn’t looking. Until they’re 3, the parents are in the water with the kids. I really don’t want to think too much about why that pool has more chlorine in it than a chemical weapons plant. I was a bit nervous this past week as I took her in for her first class where she wouldn’t have me in the water with her. You know how kids get attached to patterns, and this was certainly a big break. I dropped her off with the instructor and sat on the other side of the pool in the parent’s seats. Holy crap did she kick ass. Aside from listening better to the instructor than she ever does to me (annoying), it took all of 15 minutes for them to get her to jump in, roll over, and float on her back without help. I assumed I’d be bored out of my mind while she crawled along the edge of the pool for 30 minutes, but I sat there and couldn’t stop watching. Nearly 2 years of training (and play) came together all at once. She probably won’t be in that class very long. And I figure by the time she’s 8 she will easily destroy my pathetic swim times. When the kids pass major milestones they announce it to the entire school at the end of class and hand them ribbons for the achievements. Riley walked away with 3 that night. And as I tried to avoid tearing up, I realized those 3 ribbons meant more to me than nearly anything I have achieved in my own life. For someone who is kind of an antisocial, competitive a-hole… that was entirely unexpected. On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences Adrian’s Token Buyer’s Guide, next week. Rich quoted in the New York Times on protecting tax documents. A small quote from Rich on Anonymous hacking Panda security. Favorite Securosis Posts Adrian Lane: Defending Enterprise Data on iOS: Introduction. This is starting out to be a very good series. Mike Rothman: Mr. Market Says Security is Winning. Love being a contrarian, and Rich goes contrary to most convention (read echo chamber) thinking in this post… Mike’s Watching the Watchers post. Start of a new series on Privileged User Management, which is warming up. Other Securosis Posts Defending Enterprise Data on iOS: Introduction. Defending iOS Data: iOS Security and Data Protection. Data Flow on iOS. Incite 3/14/2012: My Kind of People. Mr. Market Says Security Is Winning. Favorite Outside Posts Adrian Lane: Let’s look these gift horses in the mouth. The “ungrateful bastard” who wrote this and I agree on many things, this one included. But where I keep my mouth shut and simply accept what I get, Jack does the right thing and points to where we need to be. Mike Rothman: My Networking Beliefs. As an old networking guy, I definitely appreciate this post by Greg Ferro. Lots of truth in here. Rich: Mozilla knew of Pwn2Own bug before CanSecWest. This is really funny, in a terribly geeky way. Research Reports and Presentations Network-Based Malware Detection: Filling the Gaps of AV. 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. Top News and Posts Patch Windows NOW!!! Major wormable vulnerability out. BBC attacked by Iran? How MAPP may help bad guys (due to lazy vendors). TSA Pre-Check lets you travel like it’s the year 2000. Talk about the ultimate proof that it’s all security theater. Someone leaked proof of concept code for the Microsoft RDP vulnerability. Windows Azure Outage. Blog Comment of the Week Remember, for every comment selected, Securosis makes a $25 donation to Hackers for Charity. This week’s best comment goes to Rory and Dre (they both contributed so much), in response to Defending iOS Data: iOS Security and Data Protection . @dre so it sounds like we’re talking about the difference between practical and theoretical here. I’d agree that theoretically iPad2/3/iPhone 4S are vulnerable to a DFU mode exploit if one is found but that currently there is no publicly available DFU mode exploit for iOS 5 running on an A5 based device (iPad 2/iPhone 4S) and that current publicly available jailbreaks can’t be done from a locked/powered off device. @ Rory: Yes, but the EMF and Dkey keys are

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.