Securosis

Menu

Research

Modernizing SecOps for Cloud

Rich February 23, 2024 No Comments

Security Operations, SecOps for short, has been one of the more difficult security domains to  modernize for cloud. It requires a combination of new subject matter expertise, new technologies, process updates, and even a slightly different mindset. Cloud impacts SecOps in ways both obvious and subtle, and because most organizations still have datacenters and offices, teams need to add new skills and update operations while still supporting everything already on their plates. It’s a daunting challenge, but one that can be made much easier to tackle by distilling down, into the core of how cloud changes things, and taking lessons from the successes of early adopters.  This paper will detail the impact of cloud on SecOps, review the core technical capabilities needed to respond, and highlight techniques for successfully modernizing security operations to support cloud operations. We will finish up with example processes you can use as templates for your own operations.   We would like to thank FireMon for licensing the content in this paper. Our unique Totally Transparent Research model allows us to perform objective and useful research without requiring paywalls or other such nonsense, which make it hard for the people who need our research to get it. A day doesn’t go by where we aren’t thankful to all the companies who license our research. Download: Modernizing_SecOps_For_Cloud   Disclosure: the author is partly employed at FireMon but this content was developed and posted independently and reviewed and edited by non-FireMon personnel. The content was originally posted as a blog series at Security Boulevard. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Multicloud: Deployment Structures and Blast Radius

Rich August 7, 2019 No Comments

In this, our second Firestarter on multicloud deployments, we start digging into the technological differences between the cloud providers. We start with the concept of how to organize your account(s). Each provider uses different terminology but all support similar hierarchies. From the overlay of AWS organizations to the org-chart-from-the-start of an Azure tenant we dig into the details and make specific recommendations. We also discuss the inherent security barriers and cover a wee bit of IAM. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Firestarter: So you want to multicloud?

Rich August 1, 2019 No Comments

This is our first in a series of Firestarters covering multicloud. Using more than one IaaS cloud service provider is, well, a bit of a nightmare. Although this is widely recognized by anyone with hands-on cloud experience that doesn’t mean reality always matches our desires. From executives worried about lock in to M&A activity we are finding that most organizations are being pulled into multicloud deployments. In this first episode we lay out the top level problems and recommend some strategies for approaching them. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Multi-Cloud Key Management 2019

Adrian Lane May 16, 2019 No Comments

Discussion on multi-cloud strategies is atop the list of inbound questions customer ask us. “How do you architect applications and what technologies will promote a cloud neutral approach?” is what is commonly asked, and all have a fear of vendor lock-in. As such, they want critical security controls to be under their control. And given most customers worry over control of encryption keys, key management is always a major issue. As such, we are re-launching our research work on multi-cloud key management. Infrastructure as a Service entails handing over some security and operational control to the service provider. But responsibility for your data security does go along with it. Your provider ensures compute, storage, and networking components are secure from external attackers and other tenants, but you must protect your data and application access to it. That means you need to control the elements of the cloud that related to data access and security, to avoid any possibility of your cloud vendor(s) viewing it. Encryption is the fundamental security technology for data security and privacy, so it should be no surprise that encryption technologies are everywhere in cloud computing. The vast majority of cloud service providers enable network (transport) encryption by default and offer encryption for data at rest to protect files and archives from unwanted inspection by authorized infrastructure personnel. But the principal concern is who has access to encryption keys, and whether clouds vendor can decrypt your data without you knowing about it. So many firms insist on brining their own keys into the cloud, not allowing their cloud vendors access to their keys. And, of course, many organizations ask how they can provide consistent protection, regardless of which cloud services they select? So this research is focused on these use cases. We hope you find this research useful. And we would like to thank nCipher Security for licensing this paper for use with their customer outreach and education programs. Like us, they receive an increasing number of customer inquiries regarding cloud key management. Support like this enables us to bring you objective material built in a Totally Transparent manner. This allows us to perform impactful research and protect our integrity. You can download the paper here Share:

Share:
Read Post

Firestarter: The RSA 2018 Episode

Rich April 12, 2018 No Comments

This week Rich, Mike, and Adrian talk about what they expect to see at the RSA Security Conference, and if it really means anything. As we do in most of our RSA Conference related discussions the focus is less on what to see and more on what industry trends we can tease out, and the potential impact on the regular security practitioner. For example, what happens when blockchain and GDPR collide? Do security vendors finally understand cloud? What kind of impact does DevOps have on the security market? Plus we list where you can find us, and, as always, don’t forget to attend the Tenth Annual Disaster Recovery Breakfast! Share:

Share:
Read Post

Firestarter: Best Practices for Root Account Security and… SQRRL!!!!

Rich February 5, 2018 No Comments

Just because we are focusing on cloud fundamentals doesn’t mean we are forgetting the rest of the world. This week we start with a discussion over the latest surprise acquisition of Sqrrl by Amazon Web Services and what it might indicate. Then we jump into our ongoing series of posts on cloud security by focusing on the best practices for root account security. From how to name the email accounts, to handling MFA, to your break glass procedures. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Firestarter: Architecting Your Cloud with Accounts

Rich January 31, 2018 No Comments

We are taking over our own Firestarter and kicking off a new series of discussions on cloud security… from soup to nuts (whatever that means). Each week for the next few months we will cover, in order, how to build out your cloud security program. We are taking our assessment framework and converting it into a series of discussions talking about what we find and how to avoid issues. This week we start with architecting your account structures, after a brief discussion of the impact of the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities since they impact cloud (at least for now) more than your local computer. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Multi-cloud Key Management

Adrian Lane May 24, 2017 No Comments

We are proud to announce the launch of our newest research paper, on multi-cloud key management, covering how to tackle data security and compliance issues in diverse cloud computing environments. Infrastructure as a Service entails handing over ownership and operational control of IT infrastructure to a third party. But responsibility for data security cannot go along with it. Your provider ensures compute, storage, and networking components are secure from external attackers and other tenants, but you must protect your data and application access to it. Some of you trust your cloud providers, while others do not. Or you might trust one cloud service but not others. Regardless, to maintain control of your data you must engineer cloud security controls to ensure compliance with internal security requirements, as well as regulatory and contractual obligations. That means you need to control the elements of the cloud that related to data access and security, to avoid any possibility of your cloud vendor(s) viewing it. Encryption is the fundamental security technology in modern computing, so it should be no surprise that encryption technologies are everywhere in cloud computing. The vast majority of cloud service providers enable network (transport) encryption by default and offer encryption for data at rest to protect files and archives from unwanted inspection by authorized infrastructure personnel. But the principal concern is who has access to encryption keys, and whether clouds vendor can decrypt your data without you knowing about it. So many firms insist on brining their own keys into the cloud, not allowing their cloud vendors access to their keys. And, of course, many organizations ask how they can provide consistent protection, regardless of which cloud services they select? So this research is focused on these use cases. We hope you find this research useful. And we would like to thank Thales eSecurity for licensing this paper for use with their customer outreach and education programs. Like us, they receive an increasing number of customer inquiries regarding cloud key management. Support like this enables us to bring you objective material built in a Totally Transparent manner. This allows us to perform impactful research and protect our integrity. You can download the paper. Share:

Share:
Read Post

Securing SAP Cloud Environments

Adrian Lane April 8, 2017 No Comments

Migrating Hana and other SAP applications to a cloud environments is a complicated process, even with the tools and services SAP provides. For many organizations security was primary barrier to adoption. But SAP and other cloud service vendors have closed many security gaps, so now we can trust that the environment and applications are at least as secure as an on-premise installation – provided you leverage appropriate security models for the cloud. But that’s where we often see a breakdown: enterprises are not taking sufficient advantage of cloud security. Additionally, because there is no single model for SAP cloud security, transitioning other business applications to the cloud often results in greater cost, less scalability, and decreased security. From the paper: “Proper implementation is tricky – if you simply ‘lift and shift’ your old model into the cloud, we know from experience that it will be less secure and cost more to operate. To realize the advantages of the cloud you need to leverage its new features and capabilities – which demands a degree of reengineering for architecture, security program, and process,” said Adrian Lane, Analyst and CTO, Securosis. “We have been receiving an increasing number of questions on SAP cloud security, so this research paper is intended to tackle major security issues for SAP cloud deployments. When we originally scoped this research project we were going to focus on the top five questions people had, and quickly realized that grossly under-served the audience needs for a more comprehensive security plan,” continued Lane. “Securing SAP Clouds” covers the division of responsibility between an organization and the cloud vendor, which tools and approaches are viable, changes to the security model and advice for putting together a cloud security program for SAP. We are very happy to announce that Onapsis is licensing this research to help educate customers and Hana users. We thank them for their support, and for their ongoing security research! Download a copy of the paper here Share:

Share:
Read Post
dinosaur-sidebar

Research

view all

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

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.