This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Which regulators and which regulations? Honestly curious because I don’t know. There is not exactly a comprehensive central cybersecurity regulator in the U.S. to my knowledge. Some might be governed by SEC, others by DOE, which can make recommendations which I’ve seen only practically enforced by market means through cyberinsurers refusing to underwrite policies without sets of protections put in place prior by the insured.
Regulators/insurers don’t promote a specific vendor, but either suggest or mandate specific controls that might be able to map to particular products/features, which is probably a GRC (governance risk compliance) pencil pusher or auditor/consultant task. Crowdstrike Falcon is a platform with lots of different features that can be licensed, but is primarily an EDR/NGAV tool that runs on workstations and servers. You’ll check one or a couple checkboxes, but not all, such as increasingly required autonomous response capabilities within a network traffic analysis IDS/IPS which is situated much differently both physically and conceptually in a cybersecurity stack than a CrowdStrike EDR.
CrowdStrike seems to have such a large footprint because of excellent positioning and business development - they were first on the cloud-managed endpoint scene while other vendors were stuck supporting legacy on-premise solutions, and they had waves of VC funding that compounded their growth.
I've found that when people handwave in this specific way there's usually a more interesting story they're condensing for time. Who is increasingly requiring autonomous response capabilities for IPS? My read is that it's barely even true on paper in 800-53 rev 5 or CMMC2.
Cyber insurers/underwriters for the policies I’ve seen which are common to a particular vertical I have exposure to. And then some extended federal requirements if the entity within that vertical has a service relationship with sensitive gov assets.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
And they are legitimately considered very good in the industry by penetration testers.
They fucked up an update big time, but they got their market position by having a competitive product.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm pretty sure this is generally pointing at NIST guidance, compliance with which has been leveled as a requirement on Federal contractors, and probably has shown up in the private sector cited as best practice for things like insurers looking at IT risks. There have also been increasingly loud recommendations from the government about software development practices generally, but I'm not sure exactly how those are enforced.
Honestly most of the relevant regulations I've worked with aren't dumb. Sometimes painful to implement, and maybe sometimes overbearing, but not completely unreasonable.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link