An Information Security Place

…for this interview?  It is titled "Embedding security has drawbacks says TippingPoint chief architect", but the explanation Brian Smith gives is about as weak as the American dollar.  Did TippingPoint marketing write the questions?  Sheesh.

Look, there is a need for embedded security AND security on the edge.  It really comes down to your business.  When good and fast security becomes built into the switch, I will look at it and judge it’s merits for MY BUSINESS (or my client’s business).  But this whole thing about switching and routing technology being outpaced by security technology is the largest piece of crap answer I have ever heard.  Of course the security technology is outpacing it.  That is because security is hot, hot, hot right now, and it has been for the last few years, whereas routing and switching are routing and switching.  But what does that mean?? 

Mr. Smith, was the incorporation of IPS into 3COM switches was a "fool’s errand", as you called it at 3:21 in the video?  Does that mean that you can’t incorporate the two?  Does it simply not work?  Is this just not feasible?  Of course not.  The reason you are saying this is because the 3COM / TP deal fell through for other reasons.  Plain and simple, 3COM was not in any kind of position in the switching market to make a dent.  I wrote about this a while back.  Here’s most of that post:

When I was an infosec manager, I was a TippingPoint customer. When I bought the TippingPoint box, stand-alone devices were still all the rage. UTM and NAC were pretty much still new terms. But right about the time TippingPoint was bought by 3com, the convergence track had started to emerge. Cisco was really getting into putting different devices in their switches. Things were really starting to move in that direction, and 3com probably thought they should do the same.

But just in case things were not what they seemed, 3com decided to test the waters (conjecture on my part, but plausible conjecture nonetheless). So they surveyed their customers (or TippingPoint customers, at least). I received one of these surveys. Among other things, it asked if I would buy a 3com enterpise switch with a TippingPoint IPS blade integrated into it. Understand that I come from the network engineering world. I have installed and configured many a switch and router. And for the immediate 4-5 years before this survey hit my inbox, 3com had been about as present in the enterprise switch space as a woman at an ISSA chapter meeting. The biggest place you saw 3com was on a NIC or a little white 8-port hub in a room full of cubicles. So, I answered a definitive “not no, but hell no”.

To clarify (if the above didn’t explain it well enough), it was the 3com switch that threw me. I wasn’t unhappy with TippingPoint (except that they had been bought by 3com). I liked the box. It served me well. If I could get a TippingPoint blade for the 4506, I would have seriously considered it. But there was no way I was going to replace my Catalyst 4506 with a 3com switch, no way, now how.

Of course, I cannot answer for every TippingPoint customer who received the survey, but I can guess that many of them answered the same way. And this makes me wonder if 3com and TippingPoint are sitting in ivory towers and ignoring the trends because it doesn’t compute that people don’t like their switches.

And to add one more thing that may add some credence to my hypothesis: I also had a couple of 3com reps come out to visit me during the final months of my tenure as an infosec manager. When my boss and I told the 3com guys that we would not consider in any way replacing our current switching infrastructure with 3com because of our impression of 3com as a serious player, they were completely surprised by our attitude. Now maybe they had never received that reaction before because we were just a little more harsh and up front with our opinions. But my immediate opinion was that they really didn’t know they had that kind of reputation. Maybe it is just me that thinks this about them, but I don’t think so.

 

So basically, what it came down to was that 3COM did not impress me, so I would never have bought their switches.  The IDEA was a good one.  They recognized that it was a good one.  But they could not make it happen because no one wanted to buy 3COM switches.  Plain and simple. 

Now let us get back to the business of security while you guys go try to fool a few more people.

Vet

I had a long talk with a client yesterday regarding IPS.  They were setting up a nice sized extranet infrastructure to serve their clients, and they needed to build some security into the design before they implemented.  They had already thought of a lot of pieces, and now they were looking at putting in IPS.  They were already being courted by one IPS company, but they wanted to know about others and what the strengths and weaknesses were.

So as I started into the discussion, I diverged a bit from the pure technical discussion and talked about the view of the network as a whole.  Basically, I tried to get them to look at the big picture of what they were buying versus just an IPS as a single silo.  What I talked about was how the one IPS they were looking at was an excellent IPS, but I also told them that they really had no big advantage over any of the other big IPS vendors in the market.  If you look at the Gartner chart for IPS, there are about 5-7 vendors in the magic quadrant.  Basically, the product is a commodity, just like anti-virus and other mature products.  Though some boxes have advantages over others, they all really can do the job.  Most are able to protect multiple segments and can handle multi-gig speeds.  Most have a default set of policies that are not very noisy and protect against the big threats.  Most are HA capable.  Most have fail open or fail close options. Etc, etc, etc.  Some people might disagree here, and I understand that.  One IPS might have a feature that another one does not that may fit a certain need.  But I contend that in a general sense, none of the big ones really have a huge advantage.

So in that light, what are the factors you have to consider?  Well, it really comes down to the intangibles.  Let’s look at a few of those:

Is the company diversified in their product line?  In today’s converging security market, that tells us whether the company is likely to be snatched up or simply disappear, depending on product quality and whether there is someone out there who has money and has a whole in their product line. 

Product diversification may also mean that the company is trying to take a look at the network as a whole versus just one piece.  If they have developed or bought different products that compliment each other and are trying to bring them together in a way that gives insight into the network and allow collaboration, then that type of company is likely planning on sticking around for a while.

In this light, also look at management of the product.  Though this is not exactly an intangible, it is still something that many companies don’t think about.  What about the learning curve for you employees?  Do you already have products from this vendor?  If so, does this new technology fit well into that console, thus lessening the time the your employees need to learn it? If a company fits the diversification example above, they might have a problem in this area.  Of course, if they are serious about making it work, they might very well have an EXCELLENT console.  Take a close look.  You also have to consider the talents of your employees with this factor.

Another intangible is support.  How well do they support their product, keeping in mind that the company with one product may be better at this versus the big one with multiple products?

There are probably many other factors to consider here, but the basic point is that when you are looking at a mature, commoditized product (this does not just apply to IPS, obviously), a decision should not be made on technical issues alone.  Look at your business. Look at your risk.  Look at your employees.  Look at the vendor as a whole.  Compare their position in the market to other vendors.  How do they stack up?  Do they seem to have tunnel vision, or are they trying to diversify?  Make sure you don’t let your technical folks make the decision by themselves and then hand you a PO to sign.  They may like the product in the short term, but you have to think long term.  You might piss off the team for a bit, but you can use the decision as a lesson to help mature your staff.

Vet