Firestarter: It’s All in the Cloud

Adrian is out, so Rich and Mike cover the latest Amazon Web Services news as their big re:Invent conference closes in. We start with the new Frankfurt datacenter, and how a court case involving Microsoft could kill off the future of all US-based cloud companies (it’s always the little things). Then we discuss directory services in the cloud, and how this indicates increasing cloud adoption and maturity at a pace we really haven’t ever seen before. The audio-only version is up too. Share:

Read Post

Building an Enterprise Application Security Program [New Series]

Over the last couple months I have had many similar conversations on enterprise application security: customers identify gaps in their security program, are unaware of the availability of certain types of solutions, or simply don’t believe that certain solutions deliver their advertised value. But I expect issues when speaking to a company who wants to implement advanced security on a Hadoop database, where technology simply may not exist to deliver the security and performance required. It is altogether different when talking about SAP or Oracle financials. These are mature platforms, often in place for more than a decade, so you would expect every aspect to be covered. Surprisingly that is often not the case. There are many reasons for these security gaps. Companies often invest in generic assessment or configuration analysis tools, which don’t actually provide an in-depth view of application configuration settings or best practices. Perhaps they were told their SIEM would collect all application logs but they don’t contain the necessary information to evaluate user actions, or they are simply too verbose to collect. The application vendors all provide lists of security best practices, but don’t list anything they do not sell, nor advise customers to uninstall unneeded components to reduce attack surface. Security teams know little about how application platforms work so they cannot independently identify which deployment models would work, and IT staff is not likely to volunteer suggestions that will require them to do more work. Finally, the largest issue is that many approaches are simply unsuitable for large enterprise applications because they will break the application, limit usability, or degrade performance, none of which are acceptable. These issues contribute to security and compliance gaps at most firms. Supply chain management, customer relationship management, enterprise resource management, business analytics, and financial transaction management, are all multi-billion dollar application platforms unto themselves. We are beyond explaining why enterprise applications need security to protect these investments – it is well established that insiders and persistent adversaries target these applications. Companies invest heavily in these applications, hardware to run them, and teams to keep them up and running. They perform extensive risk analysis on their business implications and the costs of downtime. And in many cases their security investments are a byproduct of these risk profiles. Application security trends in the 1-2% range of total application investment, but I cannot say large enterprises don’t take security seriously – they spend millions and hire dedicate staff to protect these platforms. That said, their investments are not always optimal – enterprises may bet on solutions with limited effectiveness, without a complete understanding of the available options. It is time for a fresh look. To fill some of these gaps we are starting a new series on Building an Enterprise Application Security program. We spend a lot of time on advanced technologies on the Securosis blog: variants of monitoring, auditing, assessment, threat management, application security, and so on – but we have never pulled all these facets together for companies to assemble into an enterprise application security program. Or goal is to discuss specific security and compliance use cases for large enterprise applications, highlight gaps, and explain some application-specific tools to address these issues. This will not be an exhaustive examination of enterprise application security controls, nor an examination of generic security platforms – instead we will offer a focused summary of the most common deficiencies, with suggestions for what to do about them. The remainder of this series will cover the following: Needs: Use Cases Compliance (SOX, PCI, etc.) and internal audit reporting Transaction verification Use of sensitive information Security (insider and external threats) Change management & policy enforcement Gaps: What Works and What Doesn’t Why enterprise applications are different SAP: special issues with this poster child for enterprise applications Security and compliance gaps with IAM, encryption, and data encryption Inventory, discovery, and assessment Network monitoring deficiencies Conventional application and database layer protection Skills and priorities Program Elements Assessment: discovery and configuration analysis Patching and configuration management (environment, application, database, & modules) Application and database monitoring Management frameworks and policy enforcement Logging, auditing, and compliance reports Additional recommendations Our next post will discuss use cases and problems firms need to address, which we will use to frame our subsequent discussion of security gaps. 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.