Summary: Edumacation

For those who skip the intro, the biggest security news this week was the passage of CISA, Oracle’s… interesting.. security claims, more discussion on encryption weirdness from the NSA, and security research getting a DMCA exemption. All these stories are linked down below. Yesterday I hopped in the car, drove over to the kid’s school, and participated in the time-honored tradition of the parent-teacher conference. I’m still new to this entire “kids in school” thing, with one in first grade and another in kindergarten. Before our kids ever started school I assumed the education system would fail to prepare them for their technological future. That’s an acceptance of demographic realities, not any particular criticism. Look around your non-IT friends and ask how many of them really understand technology and its fundamental underpinnings? Why should teachers be any different? As large a role as technology plays in every aspect of business and technology, our society still hasn’t crossed the threshold to a majority of the population knowing the fundamentals, beyond surface consumption. That is changing, and will continue to change, but it is a multigenerational shift. And even then I don’t think everyone will (or needs to) understand the full depths of technology like many of us do, but there are entire categories of fundamentals which society will eventually fully integrate – just as we do now with reading, writing, and basic science. Back to the parent-teacher conference. During the meeting one teacher handed us a paper with ‘recommended’ iPad apps, because they now assume most students have access to an iPad or iPhone. When she handed it over she said “here’s what our teachers recommend instead of ‘Minecraft’”. What?!? This was a full stop moment for me. Minecraft is one of the single best screen-based tools to teach kids logical thinking and creativity. And yet the school system is actively discouraging Minecraft. Which is a particularly mixed message because I think Minecraft is integrated into other STEM activities (they are in a STEM school), but I need to check. The apps on the list aren’t terrible. Some are quite good. The vast majority are reading and math focused, but there are also a few science and social studies/atlas style apps and games, and everything is grade-appropriate. There are even some creativity apps, like video makers. On the upside, I think providing a list like this is an exceptionally good idea. Not every parent spends all day reading and writing about technology. On the other hand, nearly all the apps are, well, traditional. There’s only one coding app on the list. Most of the apps are consumption focused, rather than creation focused. I’m not worried about my kids. They have been emerged in technology since before birth, with an emphasis on building and creating (and sure, they also consume a ton). They also have two parents who work(ed) in IT, and a ridiculously geeky dad who builds Halloween decorations with microcontrollers. As for everyone else? Teachers will catch up. Parents will catch up. Probably not for must of my kids’ peers, but certainly by the time they have children themselves. It takes time for such massive change, and it’s already better than what I saw my 20-year-old niece experience when she ran through the same school district. I still can’t help but think of some major missed opportunities. For example, I was… volunteered… to help teach Junior Achievement in the school. It’s a well-structured program to introduce kids to the underpinnings of a capitalist society. From participating in Hackid, it looks like there is huge potential to develop a similar program for technology. Some schools, especially in places like Silicon Valley, already have active parents bringing real-world experience into classrooms. It sure would be nice to have something like this on a national scale – beyond ‘events’ like the annual Hour of Code week. And while we’re at it, we should probably have a program so kids can teach their parents online safety. Because I’m pretty sure most of them intuitively understand it better than most parents I meet. On to the Summary: Webcasts, Podcasts, Outside Writing, and Conferences David Mortman is giving a talk on DevOps security next week. Dave Lewis over at CSO Online on Groundhog Day security. He also mentions LEGOs and Munich. Mike claims some video of him talking about some security thing will be on the web sometime soon. All I know is it will be at Dark Reading, and he isn’t always great on the details. Other Securosis Posts The Economics of Cloud Security. Hybrid Clouds: An Ugly Reality. How I got a CISSP and ended up nominated for the Board of Directors. Chewie, We’re Home. Favorite Outside Posts Adrian Lane: OMG, the machines are breeding! Mankind is doomed! DOOMED!!! Robert Graham offered a little tidbit on how his Tesla’s WiFi behaves while trolling the security press. And we’re glad he got a new car. David Mortman: Josh Corman and John Willis on containers and supply chains at the DevOps Enterprise Summit. Rich: Telecom companies track everything about you, and sell it. This is why I care so much about privacy. Even the NSA has to go through some nominal process before they can stick a location tracker and packet sniffer in your friggin’ pocket. Mike: Porn websites are the top mobile infection vector, 2015 report shows. With porn, mobile, and infection in the title, how could this not be my favorite link this week? Research Reports and Presentations Pragmatic Security for Cloud and Hybrid Networks. EMV Migration and the Changing Payments Landscape. Network-based Threat Detection. Applied Threat Intelligence. Endpoint Defense: Essential Practices. Cracking the Confusion: Encryption and Tokenization for Data Centers, Servers, and Applications. Security and Privacy on the Encrypted Network. Monitoring the Hybrid Cloud: Evolving to the CloudSOC. Security Best Practices for Amazon Web Services. Securing Enterprise Applications. Top News and Posts CISA Passes Senate Without Addressing Privacy Concerns. New DMCA Exemption is a Positive Step for Security Researchers. Two regulatory stories this week. One good (this one), and one bad (CISA). The NSA is abandoning elliptic curve crypto. That is a

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.