Securosis

Research

RSAC Guide 2015: DevOpsX Games

DevOps is one of the hottest trends in all of IT – sailing over every barrier in front of it like a boardercross racer catching big air on the last roller before the drop to the finish. (We’d translate that, but don’t want to make you feel too old and out of touch). We here at Securosis are major fans of DevOps. We think it provides opportunities for security and resiliency our profession has long dreamed of. DevOps has been a major focus of our research, and even driven some of us back to writing code, because that’s really the only way to fully understand the implications. But just because we like something doesn’t mean it won’t get distorted. Part of the problem comes from DevOps itself: there is no single definition (as with the closely related Agile development methodology), and it is as much as a cultural approach as a collection of technical tools and techniques. The name alone conveys a sense of de-segregation of duties – the sort of thing that rings security alarm bells. We now see DevOps discussed and used in nearly every major enterprise and startup we talk with, to varying degrees. DevOps is a bit like extreme sports. It pushes the envelope, creating incredible outcomes that seem nearly magical from the outside. But when it crashes and burns it happens faster than that ski jumper suffering the agony of defeat (for those who remember NBC’s Wide World of Sports… it’s on YouTube now – look it up, young’ns). Extreme sports (if that term even applies anymore) is all about your ability to execute, just like DevOps. It’s about getting the job done better and faster to improve agility, resiliency, and economics. You can’t really fake your way through building a continuous deployment pipeline, any more than you can to backflip a snowmobile (really, we can’t make this stuff up – YouTube, people). We believe DevOps isn’t merely trendy, it’s our future – but that doesn’t mean people who don’t fully understand it won’t try to ride the wave. This year expect to see a lot more DevOps. Some will be good, like the DevOps.com pre-RSA day the Monday before the conference starts. And vendors updating products to integrate security assessment into that continuous deployment pipeline. But expect plenty bad too, especially presentations on the ‘risks’ of DevOps that show someone doesn’t understand it doesn’t actually allow developers to modify production environments despite policy. As for the expo floor? We look forward to seeing that ourselves… and as with anything new, we expect to see plenty of banners proclaiming their antivirus is “DevOps ready”. Posers. Share:

Share:
Read Post

RSA Guide 2015: Get Bigger (Data) Now!!!

This year at RSA we will no doubt see the return of Big Data to the show floor. This comes along with all the muscle confusion that it generates – not unlike Crossfit. Before you hoist me to the scaffolding or pummel me with your running shoes, let’s think about this. Other than the acolytes of this exercise regimen, who truly understands it? Say “Big Data” out loud. Does that hold any meaning for you, other than a shiny marketing buzzword and marketing imagery? It does? Excellent. If you say it three times out loud a project manager will appear, but sadly you will still need to fight for your budget. Last year we leveraged the tired (nay, exhausted) analogy of sex in high school. Everyone talks about it but… yeah. You get the idea. Every large company out there today has a treasure trove of data available, but they have yet to truly gain any aerobic benefit from it. Certainly they are leveraging this information but who is approaching it in a coherent fashion? Surprisingly, quite a few folks. Projects such as the Centers for Disease Control’s data visualizations, Twitter’s “Topography of Tweets”, SETI’s search for aliens, and even Yelp’s hipster tracking map. They all leverage Big Data in new and interesting ways. Hmm, SETI and Yelp should probably compare notes on their data sets. These are projects happening, often despite the best intentions of organizational IT security departments. Big Data is here, and security teams need to get their collective heads around the situation rather than hanging about doing kipping pull-ups. As security practitioners we need to find sane ways to tackle the security aspects of these projects, to help guard against inadvertent data leakage as they thrust forward with their walking lunges. One thing we recommend is ahike out on the show floor to visit some vendors you’ve never heard of. There will be a handful of vendors developing tools specifically to protect Big Data clusters, and some delivering tools to keep sensitive data out of Big Data pools. And your Garmin will record a couple thousand more steps in the process. Second, just as many Big Data platforms and features are built by the open source community, so are security tools. These will be under-represented at the show, but a quick Google search for Apache security tools will find more options. Your internal security teams need to be aware of the issues with big data projects while striking a balance supporting business units. That will truly lead to muscle confusion for some. If you’re looking for the Big Data security purveyors, they will most likely be the ones on the show floor quietly licking wounds from their workout while pounding back energy drinks. Share:

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.