Summary: Planned Coincidence

Every year Mike, Adrian, and I get together for a couple days to review our goals and financials, and to make plans for the next year. This year we scheduled it in Denver, and by an amazing coincidence Jimmy Buffett was in town playing. Really. I promise. Total coincidence. I have been to more than my fair share of shows (and have to write this Summary on Wednesday because I will be at another show Thursday in Phoenix), but it was Mike’s first and Adrian’s second. Needless to say, a good time was had by everyone except Mike’s stomach. I warned him about the rum-infused gummy bears. 2013 was kind of a strange year for us. It looks like we grew, again, but a lot of it was shoveled into Q4. All three of us are running all over the place and cramming on projects and papers, hoping our children and pets don’t forget what we look like. I even thought about skipping our planning, but setting the corporate strategy is even more important than our other projects. I went into this trip with an open mind. I knew I wanted to change things up a bit next year, but not exactly how. In part to do more direct end-user engagement, but also to allow me to continue my more in-depth and technical cloud and Software Defined Security work, which isn’t necessarily easily dropped into licensed papers and webcasts. We actually came up with some killer ideas that are pretty exciting. I don’t know if they will work, but I think they hit a sweet spot in the market, and fit our skills and focus. It’s definitely too early to talk about them, and they aren’t as insane as building a new software platform, so launching won’t be a problem at all. We are going to hold back until January to start releasing because we need to finish the current workload and do the prep for the new shiny endeavors before we can talk about them. And this is a great situation to be in. I just spent two days hanging with two of my closest friends and my business partners, catching a Buffett show and planning out new tricks for our collective future. I’m tired, and my brain is fried, but as I go back to the grindstone of the road and writing, I not only get to finish my year with some cool research, but I get to start planning some even more exciting things for next year. Not bad. On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences Rich presenting on changes in the crypto landscape, October 30th. Favorite Securosis Posts Mike Rothman: The Great Securosis GitHub Experiment. That Mogull guy. Always pushing the envelope on openness and transparency. Interesting idea to use Github to manage feedback on our papers. Will be interesting to see if it works… Rich: Security Analysis of Pseudo-Random Number Generators with Input: /dev/random is not Robust. I spent last week in crypto training and this paper is darn interesting. Adrian: Incite 10/23/2013: What goes up…. David Mortman: Don’t Cry Over Spilt Metrics Other Securosis Posts Security Awareness Training Evolution: Quick Wins. Favorite Outside Posts Mike Rothman: Dan Geer’s Tradeoffs in Cyber Security talk. Dan Geer spoke. Dan Geer is awesome. Read. It. Now. And that’s all I have to say about that. Adrian Lane: iMessage Privacy. Regardless of whether you agree with Apple’s strategy, the post is a very educational look at security and how attackers approach interception. David Mortman: How to lose $172,222 a second for 45 minutes. Gal Shpantzer: Why the Sistrunk ICS/SCADA vulns are a big deal. Research Reports and Presentations Firewall Management Essentials. A Practical Example of Software Defined Security. Continuous Security Monitoring. API Gateways: Where Security Enables Innovation. Identity and Access Management for Cloud Services. Dealing with Database Denial of Service. 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. Top News and Posts Apple and Adobe sandbox Flash in Safari on OS X 10.9. Google%20launches%20new%20anti-DDoS%20service%20called%20’Project%20Shield’ Apple iMessage Open to Man in the Middle, Spoofing Attacks. Yes and no, and I wish I wasn’t traveling so much and could clarify how this appears to be overstated. Technically Apple could man in the middle, but it isn’t something random employees can do, nor do I think Apple would do it without a massive legal threat from the NSA or equivalent, which they would probably fight. Not that it couldn’t happen… Blog Comment of the Week This week’s best comment goes to DS, in response to Incite 10/23/2013: What goes up…. We’ve known for years (or should have known if we read the research) that security breaches don’t impact stock value. This is a trap many security folks find themselves in because they don’t understand their business, or business at all, so they use the most obvious and coarse metric of business impact. … The impact from a breach is complex and cannot be measured by one factor. There are fines and penalties. There are negative perceptions which can be leveraged against you (I can’t say how many sales calls I got from RSA competitors after their breach), there is lost productivity from having to divert resources to deal with customer complaints, there is lost focus on strategy while execs try to deal with the press requests and client enquires. RSA’s breach cost around 100M if you believe the press. This is 100M not spent on developing new products or landing new customers, but instead spent preserving their base and protecting SecureID. This is not 100M well spent. 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.