Securosis

Research

Web Application Security Program

Web Application Security is an incredibly difficult undertaking, and one of the papers we are most proud of is this one: Building a Web Application Security Program (attached below). Web Applications not only have many of the same threats and issues as traditional applications, but by their nature, have a whole additional set of issues to worry about as well. They require a different approach and analysis, and we hope that you will follow the use cases and adapt the technologies and process improvements suggested to meet your organizational needs. As the science of web application security is advancing very quickly, and as the attacks against web applications and platforms continues to evolve, our approach and recommendations will change. As we anticipate periodic updates to the content, we recommend that you periodically re-visit this section for alterations and amendments. This pages is provided to allow you a place to participate with comments, recommendations or critiques in the comment fields below. As always, we research and write the content, and sponsors choose to participate only after the content was made publicly available on the blog. We would like to thank Core Security, Imperva and Qualys for their sponsorship of this paper. (Version 1.0, July 2009) Building a Web Application Security Program. (PDF) Attachments WebAppSec_Programv1.pdf [1.3MB] Share:

Share:
Read Post

Content Discovery Whitepaper

Content Discovery and DLP: Best Practices for Stored Data Discovery and Protection. By: Rich Mogull This paper outlines some of the techniques and technologies for content discovery as used by Data Loss Prevention Platforms, and the trade offs each provides. (Version 1.0) Content Discovery Best Practices for DLP. (PDF) Attachments DLP-Content-Discovery-Best-Practices.pdf [87KB] Share:

Share:
Read Post

Best Practices for Endpoint DLP

Data Loss Prevention This paper covers our recommendations for using endpoint DLP- including major features, what to look for, and deployment recommendations. Since we generally recommend full-suite DLP solutions over endpoint only solutions, you will notice the paper focuses more on endpoint DLP as part of a larger DLP program. Thanks to Symantec for sponsoring (as always, the content was developed completely independently of any sponsorship). (Version 1.0) Best Practices for Endpoint DLP Usage. (PDF) Attachments BestPracticesforEndpointDLP.pdf [1.2MB] Share:

Share:
Read Post

Selecting a Database Activity Monitoring Solution

Understanding and Selecting a Database Activity Monitoring Solution white paper. This paper examines the business requirements for monitoring databases, as well as the technologies that assist in capturing and analyzing that activity. Rich discusses the compliance and security issues that organizations face, and the options they have at their disposal to identify and report on transactions that fail to meet business best practices. As there are many ways to collect information in and around relational databases, and still more methods to analyze and report on the findings, Rich digs into the nuts and bolts to offer the reader a comparative analysis of the technology options available, and how they address end user requirements. This research is recommended to be used in conjunction with other application security tools, as many web and traditional applications rely upon database technology to store, manage, and report on data – linking the compliance and security requirements together. (Version 1.0, March 2008) Understanding and Selecting a Database Activity Monitoring Solution. (PDF) Attachments DAM-Whitepaper-final.pdf [1.5MB] Share:

Share:
Read Post

Securing Enterprise Applications

We cover application security extensively on this blog, but normally we are trying to demystify a specific technology area to help companies understand what to look for in products, and how to differentiate real capabilities from marketing fluff. But in light of recent conversations with large enterprises it has become clear that most of these firms have gaps in their security program, specifically in and around the major enterprise applications which are core to their business. This is surprising because platforms like SAP and Oracle have been in place for over a decade, so you might expect that every facet of security to have some coverage by now. And they are surprised to hear these gaps exist, after thinking their tools and processes provided complete coverage. So we decided to take a look at application platforms and highlight the common deficiencies we see. Here is an except from our paper: Supply chain management, customer relationship management, enterprise resource management, business analytics, and financial transaction management, are all multi-billion dollar application platforms unto themselves. Every enterprise depends upon them to orchestrate core business functions, spend tens of millions of dollars on software and support. 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, so we 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. We are happy Onapsis reached out to sponsor this research paper, and embraced our Totally Transparent Research model. You can download a PDF directly: SecureEnterpriseApps_FINAL.pdf Share:

Share:
Read Post

The Business Justification for Data Security

The Business Justification for Data Security is one of our more important pieces of research. It describes how to evaluate data security investments, map the potential investment to your business needs, then build a business justification case. It starts with a discussion of data security issues, then reviews alternative models (and their flaws), and finishes presents our justification methodology. Attached is the Whitepaper. Thanks to our sponsor, McAfee. (Like all our research, this was developed independently from our sponsor). Please feel free to add comments or make suggestions, which we will consider for any upcoming revisions to the paper. (Version 1.0; February 2009) Attachments TheBusinessJustificationForDataSecurityV10.pdf [199KB] Share:

Share:
Read Post
dinosaur-sidebar

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.