Are independent researchers out for fame?
As a security manager for a large organization, I try to keep an eye on vulnerability disclosures from all sources -- news, blogs, research groups, vendors, etc. However, X-Force recently released a report that seemed to cast a shadow on independent researchers. If those guys are out for fame, as the report suggests, should we pay less attention to them?

    Requires Free Membership to View

    SearchSecurity.com members gain immediate and unlimited access to breaking industry news, virus alerts, new hacker threats, highly focused security newsletters, and more -- all at no cost. Join me on SearchSecurity.com today!

    Michael S. Mimoso, Editorial Director

    By submitting your registration information to SearchSecurity.com you agree to receive email communications from TechTarget and TechTarget partners. We encourage you to read our Privacy Policy which contains important disclosures about how we collect and use your registration and other information. If you reside outside of the United States, by submitting this registration information you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Your use of SearchSecurity.com is governed by our Terms of Use. You may contact us at webmaster@TechTarget.com.

Security professionals are paid to protect the private data and intellectual property of their organizations. That means it's necessary to evaluate every credible threat and decide if/when to take action.

Infosec pros don't have the luxury of playing favorites in terms of where credible threat information comes from, so I think it would be a bad idea to take any legitimate threat information less seriously.

That being said, clearly there are a number of security researchers out there that are more interested in their own celebrity status than helping out the industry, but those individuals are few and far between. Most of the researchers I know actually lose money by doing their research -- given the opportunity cost of poking at applications and network infrastructure -- as opposed to billing large customers a lot of money to tell them where they are exposed.

The X-Force survey was arbitrary at best. It used a criticality metric that is subjective and probably not relevant to most organizations. Of course, they have to keep their own research teams motivated, so it's clear why they would beat the drum for that kind of survey.

A lot of these rumblings about independent security researchers are irrelevant. The sooner a potential security issue is exposed, the better. If that information comes from a big company, that's great. If it comes from an independent researcher, that's good, too.

Keep in mind the bad guys don't play favorites. Neither should anyone else.

More information:

This was first published in August 2008