Friday Summary: STEM

A few days after returning from DEF CON my family experienced an inevitable life-changing event you cannot really prepare for. Kindergarten. That’s right. If you have been following this site since it started 8 years ago, you have watched as I went from a newly married dude in his 30’s traipsing around the world, to a… and I find this really hard to say… responsible parent with school-aged children. My life schedule is now officially defined by the State of Arizona and the Paradise Valley Unified School District. So long off-week Disney trips; hello PTO, early dismissal days, and parent/teacher meetings. To be honest, it’s pretty exciting. For some reason American society thinks that if you manage to keep your kids alive for the first five years, then the state should step up and provide a little support and education. Those of you who ran through the private daycare gauntlet know exactly what I am talking about. The thing my daughter is most excited about? The idea of a teacher sticking around for more than three months. We actually went ahead and got our 5-year-old accepted to a charter school that’s closer to our home than the school she would normally go to (due to the vagaries of subdivisions). It’s actually a normal public school, but they get a little extra funding and have a STEM program, and it is considered an in-district transfer. We got our 3-year-old into the pre-K program at the same school. I have already experienced some highs and lows with the STEM program. It was very important to me – even if my kids go into non-technology careers, a solid technical foundation will help in whatever they do. Also, I hoped going to a STEM-enhanced school would help compensate for the many issues with technology and science education for girls. I wasn’t certain how often they had STEM class, but quickly learned they attend every week. Not bad for a group of kids who generally cannot read yet. Then again, last week our conversation went like this. “How was school? What did you do?” “We did this thing called STIM?” “Awesome! That’s STEM! It’s science and technology! What did you do” “We colored a picture of a scientist.” “Oh.” This week they talked about what scientists do. It wasn’t terrible, and she learned that science is about asking questions. On the other hand, over the weekend we played Robot Turtles and started learning about how that board game teaches programming. And how we can use it to program our Lego robot. And the next day the kids begged me to do science, so I pulled out our polymer lab kit and we experimented with making fake snow, absorbing water, and making goo. The weekend before they asked to go the the Arizona Science Center and we had a total temper tantrum pulling them out of the paper airplane exhibit because her helicopter design wasn’t working. Heck, I took them to HacKid and they loved it, even the 3-year-old. I really hope the classes go hands-on soon, because talking about something is no way to foster lifelong interest. We live in a golden age for science and technology education. Instead of learning to program to move a fake turtle on a screen (let’s be honest, it was barely a pixel), our kids can move real robots in the real world… without knowing how to read. 3D printers, microscope lenses for phones, cheap bio sensors, drones, microprocessors – technology has never been more accessible (at least if you live in an affluent area – let’s be honest). My kids will get this all at home. Those are my hobbies, and I hope my love of science and technology influences them. It will be nice if school reinforces that, but I will not rely on it. There is one exception to my golden age comment – it’s a crappy time for chemistry sets thanks to terrorists and meth dealers. Or an overly-paranoid government and stupid DHS rules. Or something like that. On to the Summary: Favorite Securosis Posts Adrian Lane: CISO’s Head Asplode. Mike Rothman: Firestarter: You Can’t Handle the Gartner. I’ll admit it. I don’t watch other folks videocasts or listen to their podcasts. But I would watch/listen to ours. Mostly because it’s entertaining, and even helpful. And yes, we actually have a good time recording it. Rich: APT hits the ER. There is much more to this than you think. I know of some big healthcare breaches that originated overseas but haven’t been made public. Other Securosis Posts Incite 8/20/2014: Better get a Bucket. 21st Century Shakedown. Favorite Outside Posts Adrian Lane: 96% decline in NYC car theft. Interesting how a single innovation can thwart an entire class of security issues. Mike Rothman: Visualization for Security. We (as an industry) aren’t very good at visualization. So check out this deck from Raffael Marty, who is one of the leading visualization dudes in the industry. And learn some stuff. Rich: Apple begins storing user data in China. It’s going to be interesting to see how Apple handles user privacy overseas, considering their intense focus on privacy as a competitive differentiator here in the US. The fact is you simply cannot offer these services in some countries without opening them to the local government, in ways you don’t have to here, even with all our recent NSA concerns. Gunnar Peterson: Michael Daniel’s Path to the White House: CyberSec Coordinator Tells Why Lack of Tech Know-How Helps. What’s next? A Treasury Secretary who brags about not knowing about banks? You can’t make it up. I get that execs (a czar counts as an exec, right?) cannot be down “in the weeds” but you have to be able to tell a weed from a flower or a vegetable. Rich adds: this astounds me. It shouldn’t but it does, and the fact that he sees this as an advantage means he is completely unqualified for his job. Dave Lewis: The Puerile

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.