Captured from an IRC channel following RSAC
rS@DuD3: lol my BFFL haz nu ngfw stopz l33t haxxors c0ld |
Parsing hacker chat is almost as difficult as parsing market hype or analyst-speak. The takeaway from the conversation between grtnrg@l and rSaDuD3 is as timeless as the Shakesperean phrase "What's in a name?". The lesser quoted of Juliet's speech in that scene is even more apropos:
"Tis but thy name that is my enemy..."
Don't get distracted by analysts who make or break markets through exhortation or extortion, or vendors who think it's easier to conjure up a new market than compete in an existing one. It's entirely irrelevant whether your vendor is seeling you a unified threat management system, next generation firewall, or web application firewall. What really matters is whether the functionality the system offers meets your requirements for securing your application mix.
Whether you are shopping for groceries for a low cholestrol diet or a security features for application protection, you will always be best served by making informed choices. Unfortunately, the Internet can be the best or worst source for conducting research on any product because the "noise to signal" ratio (in this case, the amount of biased comparisons, uncorroborated testing and unqualified sources constitutes noise) is very high.
The best sources for informed choices are 3rd party, independent and trustworthy. As you research appication protection hardware or software, consider the source as well as the signal. What kind of track record does the analyst or consultant have? What kind of testing have they conducted (and are you satisfied that it's adequately scientific or empirical)? Who paid for the testing? Do the testing criteria appear unbiased? It often doesn't take a whole lot of work to weed out the charlatans and the effort can prove the difference when you commit to deployment.
Hi,
I'm tempted to begin with "they might if they were in marketing."
You're right. People don't typically talk like this on IRC.
The chat is intentionally exaggerated. The conversation is imaginary, used simply in a lighthearted effort to illustrate that it's silly for commercial firewall vendor marketing campaigns to base a claim of "mine is better" solely on the vendor's ability to spin a new name for what is really a class of firewall that's been around for a while and is evolving.
Posted by: Security Skeptic | Wednesday, 22 June 2011 at 05:20 PM
Sorry. I don't really believe people talk like that on IRC in 2011. If you would like to prove it, please post a link to the server and irc channel where people are apparently still chatting as if it were the 80s.
Posted by: ircwatchdog | Wednesday, 22 June 2011 at 09:23 AM