Securosis

Menu

Research

Beware of Self-Proclaimed Experts

Mike Rothman January 15, 2013 1 Comment

“Experts” who tell you to do dumb things… are not experts Dump anything you don’t use. Dump anything with a proven track record of failure which you don’t need (for example, if you don’t need Java, uninstall it). That’s the easy bit, the rest requires thought and effort. If you need Java for desktop apps, but don’t need Java in your browser – disable the browser plugins. You might find it a bit strange when we tell you to beware of experts – especially because we are often hyped as experts. But it’s not. The day we start believing our hype and calling ourselves experts in anything beside pontificating and drinking coffee, we’re done in this business. We’re fortunate to know a lot of experts, but knowing and being are very different things. Jack’s point is exactly right. Anyone can talk to the press and that supposedly makes them an expert. It would be funny except that many of these folks say stupid and wrong things, and because they show up in reputable publications they must be right. Not so much. It’s easy to say things. It’s hard to do things, especially restrictive things like eliminating Java and IE from your environment. Is almost impossible to do these resrictive things on an enterprise scale. And that triggers Jack’s point about dumping software you don’t use. It’s convenient to have a standard desktop image, but that will involve basically allowing everything on it. That’s not a path to security success. And how to deal with experts providing bad advice? Triangulate everything. Everyone has an opinion. Solicit a variety of different folks and see what they have to say. The more weighty the decision, the more folks you should talk to. Sometimes the opinions will be consistent and that makes the decision easy. Sometimes they aren’t, and then you have to figure out what’s right in the context of that decision. Which is why you make the big bucks. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Time to Play Nice with SCADA Kids

Dave Lewis January 15, 2013 No Comments

From the BBC: The US government has told thousands of companies to beef up protection of computers which oversee power plants and other utilities. The action comes after a survey revealed that thousands of these systems can be found online. The survey was carried out via a publicly available search engine that pinpointed computers controlling critical infrastructure. This comes as little surprise. I have used Shodan and found a lot of similar issues with externally exposed systems. I spent quite a few years in that sector and have learned that there is an inherent disconnect in how control system operators and security folks view these issues. They typically don’t play well together. Control system operators are good at their jobs. They keep the lights on. However, on occasion they take a focus on convenience that can ultimately expose critical systems to the wilds of the Internet. Enter the security folks who gleefully rub their hands together at all the missteps taken by engineering folks. There are two ways this can play out. Security folks can help them better understand the security issues and work with them, as Bob and Jacob did, or they can point and laugh. Sadly too often the path taken leads to the schoolyard. 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.