Building a TI Program: Success and Sharing

To wrap up our series on Building a Threat Intelligence Program (Introduction; Gathering TI; Using TI), we need to jump back to the beginning for a bit. How do you define success of the program? More importantly, how can you kickstart the program with a fairly high-profile success to show the value of integrating external data into your defenses, and improve your security posture? That involves getting a quick win and then publicizing it. Quick Win The lowest-hanging fruit in threat intel is using it to find an adversary already in your environment who you didn’t know about. Of course it would be better if you didn’t have an active adversary within your defenses, but that is frankly an unlikely scenario. The reality is that some devices in your environment are already compromised – it’s a question of whether you know about them. You are already doing security monitoring (you can thank compliance for that), so it’s just a matter of searching your existing repository of security data for indicators from your threat feeds. Any log aggregation or SIEM platform will perform a search like this. Of course it’s a manual process, and that’s fine for right now – you’re just looking for a quick win. Once you complete the search one of two things happens. Perhaps you found an active adversary you didn’t know about. You can drop the proverbial mic at this point – you have proven the value of external threat intel clearly. But before you spend a lot of time congratulating yourself, you have an incident response to get moving. Obviously you’ll document it, and be able to tell a compelling story of how TI was instrumental in identifying the attack earlier than you would have discovered it otherwise. If you don’t find a smoking gun you’ll need to be a little more creative. We suggest loading up a list of known bad IP addresses into your egress firewall and looking for the inevitable traffic to those sites, which may indicate C&C nodes or other malicious activity. The value isn’t as pronounced as finding an active adversary, but it illustrates your new ability to find malicious traffic sooner using a TI feed. Keep in mind that the Quick Win is just that. It’s shows short-term value for an investment in threat intel. This can (and should) take place within any proof of concept you run with TI vendors during procurement. If you aren’t getting immediate value, either you are using the wrong data source and/or tool, or you already had a strong security posture and will likely get better short-term value from another project. Sustained Success We didn’t call this series “Getting a Quick Win with TI”, so we need to expand our aperture a bit and focus on turning the quick win into sustainable success. Of course you accomplish this by examining your process from a process-centric perspective. There are three main aspects of building out the program from the success of a quick win: Operationalizing TI: We covered this in depth in our last post on Using TI. We suggest starting by integrating the TI into your security monitoring environment. Once that is operational you can add additional use cases, such as integrating into your perimeter gateways and egress filters for proactive blocking, as well as leveraging the data within your incident response process. Evaluating TI Sources: This is a key aspect of optimizing your program. You cannot just assume the data source(s) you selected now will provide the same impact over time. Things change, including adversaries and TI providers. You are under constant scrutiny for how your security program is performing, so your TI vendors (actually all your vendors) will be under similar scrutiny. You should be able to close the loop by tracking TI, to alerts, to blocked or identified attacks, by instrumenting your security environment to track this data. Some commercial TI platforms offer this information directly, but alternately you could build it into your SIEM or other controls. Selling the Value: Senior executives, including your CIO, have a lot of things to deal with every day. You cannot count on them remembering much beyond the latest fire to appear in the inbox today. So you need to systematically produce reports that show the value of TI. This should be straightforward, usings your instrumentation for evaluating TI sources. This is another topic to cover in your periodic meetings with senior management. Especially when the renewal is coming up and you need to keep the funding. Executing on a successful security program requires significant planning and consistent execution. You cannot afford to focus only on the latest attack or incident (although you also need to do some of that), but must also also think and act strategically; here a programmatic approach offers huge dividends. If you really want to magnify your impact, you’ll need to move beyond tactical day-to-day security battles, and implement a program for both TI and security activities in general. Sharing The success of threat intelligence hinges upon organizations sharing information about adversaries and tactics, so everyone can benefit from surviving attacks. For years this information sharing seemed like an unnatural act to enterprises. A number of threat intelligence vendors emerged to fill the gap, gathering data from a variety of open and proprietary sources. But we see a gradual growth in willingness of organizations to share information with other organizations of similar size or within an industry. Of course threat information can be sensitive, so sharing with care and diligence are critical aspects of a threat intelligence program. The first decision point for sharing is to define the constituency to share information with. This can be a variety of organizations, including: ISAC: Many the larger industries are standing up their own Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISAC), either as part of an industry association or funded by the larger companies in the industry. These ISACs are objective and exist to provide a safe place to collect and share industry threat information, and also offer value-added data analysis. If there is an ISAC for your industry,

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.