Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Careers & People

2/8/2017
10:30 AM
Mike D. Kail
Mike D. Kail
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

What to Watch (& Avoid) At RSAC

A renowned security veteran shares his RSA dance card, offering views on technologies destined for the dustbin of history and those that will move the industry forward.

As tens of thousands of IT executives, security leaders, and cyber engineers prepare to attend the 2017 RSA Security Conference in San Francisco next week, I put together a list of what I feel are the top technologies and areas to look at, both at the conference, and in the coming year.

First, a quick overview of the dinosaurs - technologies I am not interested in seeing, mainly because I don’t believe that these incremental approaches have  made significant progress against hackers.  

Image Source: sruilk via Shutterstock
Image Source: sruilk via Shutterstock

  • Endpoint Protection, including, for example, “next-gen,” money-backed guarantees, and other “gimmicks.” It seems to me that these technologies are always trying to keep up versus actually being proactive by constantly learning and adapting to new threats and attacks. 
  • SIEM. This is perhaps one of the least sexy sectors in the vast cybersecurity landscape. As more and more devices become part of the overall elastic network perimeter, the rate of data being produced is explosive. Once again, this is a technology that is always trying to catch up even though the operational costs of running and maintaining it are not trivial.
  • Incident Response Automation. (Otherwise known as, “How can we get the post-mortem completed as quickly as possible?”) Instead of trying to solve for something that’s already occurred, how about we start focusing on actually preventing the majority of incidents from happening in the first place? Advancing automation for more secure products and processes is good but right now the emphasis is in the wrong place.  

Image Source: StockPhotosLV via Shutterstock
Image Source: StockPhotosLV via Shutterstock

These are the areas that I believe are extremely compelling, and if developed and implemented correctly, can help security teams move in a positive direction towards improving their overall resiliency.

  • IoT Security. Internet-enabled now seems to be table stakes for any new device being released to the market. Given the recent large scale attacks caused by IoT devices, there needs to be an overall standard, and I really hope that UL starts being more transparent. Its Cybersecurity Assurance Program is a good start, but there needs to be far greater diligence applied to it.
  • Identity Management. Infrastructure has transformed into software-defined and elastic, yet most identity provider solutions still remain quite rigid. Many also only focus on the AuthN (authentication) part of identity versus AuthZ (Authorization),  where innovation should occur, combined with simple best practices such as “least privileges.’’ In the age where everything has an identity, there should be a platform that is adaptive enough to support this. 
  • Artificial Intelligence + Machine Learning. Skills shortage or not, scaling out human capital to attempt to keep pace with "The Singularity" is not an option. Continuous analysis and learning using a variety of techniques, including Behavioral Analysis and Game Theory, is what is required to truly move the needle in cybersecurity. This area also overlaps with my next area - DevOps - and the goal of creating a true culture of DevSecOps. In other words, an AI/ML solution has to be an API-driven platform solution, not another point-solution tool. (Note: If you are learning or hyperfocused on AI in general, you may want to check out Gigaom AI, also taking place in SF during RSAC).
  • DevSecOps. One of my core assertions is that security engineers need to adopt a software engineering mindset and approach to solutions. This is not dissimilar to what happened to “classic” system administrators during the shift to DevOps. Security needs to be seamlessly integrated into the entire software development lifecycle, instead of being a barrier to deploy and the “Department of No.”

Whether you agree with my choices or not, I hope that I have given you a different perspective into a variety of cybersecurity technologies. Controversial and innovative thinking is what drives progress! Share your thoughts in the comments.

Related Content:

 

Mike D. Kail is Chief Innovation Officer at Cybric. Prior to Cybric, Mike was Yahoo's chief information officer and senior vice president of infrastructure, where he led the IT and global data center functions for the company. Prior to joining Yahoo, Mike served as vice ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
Breaches Are Inevitable, So Embrace the Chaos
Ariel Zeitlin, Chief Technology Officer & Co-Founder, Guardicore,  11/13/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-13581
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
An issue was discovered in Marvell 88W8688 Wi-Fi firmware before version p52, as used on Tesla Model S/X vehicles manufactured before March 2018, via the Parrot Faurecia Automotive FC6050W module. A heap-based buffer overflow allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary ...
CVE-2019-13582
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
An issue was discovered in Marvell 88W8688 Wi-Fi firmware before version p52, as used on Tesla Model S/X vehicles manufactured before March 2018, via the Parrot Faurecia Automotive FC6050W module. A stack overflow could lead to denial of service or arbitrary code execution.
CVE-2019-6659
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
On version 14.0.0-14.1.0.1, BIG-IP virtual servers with TLSv1.3 enabled may experience a denial of service due to undisclosed incoming messages.
CVE-2019-6660
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
On BIG-IP 14.1.0-14.1.2, 14.0.0-14.0.1, and 13.1.0-13.1.1, undisclosed HTTP requests may consume excessive amounts of systems resources which may lead to a denial of service.
CVE-2019-6661
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
When the BIG-IP APM 14.1.0-14.1.2, 14.0.0-14.0.1, 13.1.0-13.1.3.1, 12.1.0-12.1.4.1, or 11.5.1-11.6.5 system processes certain requests, the APD/APMD daemon may consume excessive resources.