Securosis

Research

Friday Summary: August 23, 2013

With seven trips in the last eight weeks – and I would have been 8 for 8 had I not been sick one week – I’d have been out of the office the entire last two months. It almost feels weird blogging again but there is going to be a lot to write about in the coming weeks given the huge amount of research underway. Something really hit home the other day when I was finishing up a research project. Every day I learn more about computer security, yet every day – on a percentage basis – I know less about computer security. Despite continuous research and learning, the field grows what seems like an exponential rate. The number of new subject areas, threats and response techniques grows faster than any person can keep up with. I was convinced that in the 90s I could ‘know’ pretty much all you needed to know about computer security; that concept is now laughable. Every new thing that has electrons running through it creates a new field for security. Hacking pacemakers and power meters and vehicle computer is not surprising, and along with it the profession continues to grow far beyond a single topic to hundreds of sciences, with different distinct attack and defense perspectives. No person has a hope of being an expert in more than a couple sub-disciplines. And I think that is awesome! Every year there is new stuff to learn, both the ‘shock and awe’ attack side, as well as the eternally complex side of defense. What spawned this train of thought was Black Hat this year, where I saw genuine enthusiasm for security, and in many cases for some very esoteric fields of study. My shuttle bus on the way to the airport was loaded with newbie security geeks talking about how quantum computing was really evolving and going to change security forever. Yeah, whatever; the point was the passion and enthusiasm they brought to Black Hat and BSides. Each conversation I overheard was focused on one specific area of interest, but the discussions quickly led them into other facets of security they may not know anything about – social engineering, encryption, quantum computing, browser hacking, app sec, learning languages and processors and how each subsystem works together … and on and on. Stuff I know nothing about, stuff I will never know about, yet many of the same type of attacks and vulnerabilities against a new device. Since most of us here at Securosis are now middle-aged and have kids, it’s fun for me to see how each parent is dealing with the inevitability of their kids growing up with the Internet of Things. Listening to Jamie and Rich spin different visions of the future where their kids are surrounded by millions of processors all trying to alter their reality in some way, and how they want to teach their kids to hack as a way to learn, as a way to understand technology, and as a way to take control of their environment. I may know less and less, but the community is growing vigorously, and that was a wonderful thing to witness. On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences Rich on Threatpost- How I Got Here. I got to do my third favorite thing, talk about myself. Dave Mortman on Big Data Security Challenges. Mike’s DR column “Prohibition for 0-day Exploits”. Mike quoted in CRN about Proofpoint/Armorize deal. Favorite Securosis Posts Rich: The CISO’s Guide to Advanced Attackers. Mike’s latest paper is great. Especially because I keep having people thank me for writing it when he did all the work. And no, I don’t correct them. Adrian Lane: Hygienically Challenged. After 10 weeks of travel, I’m all too familiar with this element of travel. But after 3 days fishing and hiking in the Sierra’s I was one of these people. Sorry to the passengers on that flight. David Mortman: Research Scratchpad: Stateless Security. Mike Rothman: Lockheed-Martin Trademarks “Cyber Kill Chain”. “Cyberdouche” Still Available. A post doesn’t have to be long to be on the money, and this one is. I get the need to protect trademarks, but for that right you’ll take head shots. Cyberdouche FTW. Other Securosis Posts “Like” Facebook’s response to Disclosure Fail. Research Scratchpad: Stateless Security. New Paper: The 2014 Endpoint Security Buyer’s Guide. Incite 8/21/2013 — Hygienically Challenged. Two Apple Security Tidbits. Lockheed-Martin Trademarks “Cyber Kill Chain”. “Cyberdouche” Still Available. IBM/Trusteer: Shooting Across the Bow of the EPP Suites. New Paper: The CISO’s Guide to Advanced Attackers. Favorite Outside Posts Adrian Lane: Making Sense of Snowden. Look at my comments in Incite a couple weeks back and then read this. Chris Pepper: Darpa Wants to Save Us From Our Own Dangerous Data. Rich: Facebook’s trillion-edge, Hadoop-based and open source graph processing engine. David Mortman: Looking inside the (Drop) box. Mike Rothman: WRITERS ON WRITING; Easy on the Adverbs, Exclamation Points and Especially Hooptedoodle. Elmore Leonard died this week. This article he wrote for the NYT sums up a lot about writing. Especially this: “If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.” Research Reports and Presentations The 2014 Endpoint Security Buyer’s Guide. The CISO’s Guide to Advanced Attackers. Defending Cloud Data with Infrastructure Encryption. Network-based Malware Detection 2.0: Assessing Scale, Accuracy and Deployment. Quick Wins with Website Protection Services. Email-based Threat Intelligence: To Catch a Phish. Network-based Threat Intelligence: Searching for the Smoking Gun. Understanding and Selecting a Key Management Solution. Building an Early Warning System. Implementing and Managing Patch and Configuration Management. Top News and Posts Hackers for Hire. Bradley Manning Sentenced to 35 Years in Prison Declassified Documents Prove NSA Is Tapping the Internet ‘Next Big’ Banking Trojan Spotted In Cybercrime Underground How the US (probably) spied on European allies’ encrypted faxes Researcher finds way to commandeer any Facebook account from his mobile phone Blog Comment of the Week This week’s best comment goes to michael hyatt, in response to Research Scratchpad: Stateless Security. I think we’re working our way in that direction, though not as explicitly as you define it. But while

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.