<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.gmailquote
{mso-style-name:gmail_quote;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Because its absurd to write a review for a service without actually
experiencing the service. The original poster’s messages have only had
entertainment value, they’ve had no value from an information security
perspective. If you’d like to provide a link to your MSN profile and facebook
pages I’ll write up a resume for you. Does that sound like a good idea?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
full-disclosure-bounces@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-bounces@lists.grok.org.uk] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Epic<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, December 20, 2007 11:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> c0redump<br>
<b>Cc:</b> full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Full-disclosure] [Professional IT Security Providers
-Exposed] Cybertrust ( C + )<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Isn't ANY review subjective to
opinion? I do not understand the basis of this flame.
It appears to me that a lot of the reviews on this site offer some great insight
into the companies being presented. Granted it is an opinion, but
that is what a blog is isn't it? <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmailquote>On 12/20/07, <b>c0redump</b> <<a
href="mailto:c0redump@ackers.org.uk">c0redump@ackers.org.uk</a>> wrote:</span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Exactly. Your 'grading' is based on your personal
opinion.<br>
<br>
Do us all a favour and get a proper job. <br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "guiness.stout" <<a href="mailto:guinness.stout@gmail.com">guinness.stout@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <<a href="mailto:full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk">full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
</a>><br>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 2:05 PM<br>
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] [Professional IT Security Providers -Exposed]<br>
Cybertrust ( C + )<br>
<br>
<br>
> I'm not really clear on how you are grading these
companies. I've had <br>
> no personal experience with them but I don't decide a companies<br>
> quality of work simply by their website and what information I get<br>
> from some customer support person. These "grades"
seem pointless and <br>
> frankly unfounded. You should reword your grading system to
specify<br>
> the ease of use of their websites and not the service they provide.<br>
> Especially if you haven't ordered any services from them. I'm
not <br>
> defending anyone here just pointing out some flaws in this
"grading."<br>
><br>
> On Dec 20, 2007 12:11 AM, secreview <<a
href="mailto:secreview@hushmail.com">secreview@hushmail.com</a>> wrote: <br>
>> One of our readers made a request that we review Cybertrust<br>
>> ("<a href="http://www.cybertrust.com">http://www.cybertrust.com</a>").
Cybertrust was recently acquired by<br>
>> Verizon <br>
>> and as a result this review was a bit more complicated and required a
lot<br>
>> more digging to complete (In fact its now Cybertrust and Netsec).
Never<br>
>> the<br>
>> less, we managed to dig information specific to Cybertrust out of
Verizon <br>
>> representatives. We would tell you that we used the website for<br>
>> information<br>
>> collection, but in all reality the website was useless. Not only was
it<br>
>> horribly written and full of marketing fluff, but the services were
not <br>
>> clearly defined.<br>
>><br>
>> As an example, when you view the Cybertrust services in their drop
down<br>
>> menu<br>
>> you are presented with the following service offerings: Application <br>
>> Security, Assessments, Certification, Compliance/Governance,
Consulting,<br>
>> Enterprise Security, Identity Management Investigative Response<br>
>> /Forensics,<br>
>> Managed Security Services, Partner Security Program Security
Management <br>
>> Program, and SSL Certificates. The first thing you think is "what
the<br>
>> hell?"<br>
>> the second is "ok so they offer 12 services".<br>
>><br>
>> Well as you dig into each service you quickly find out that they do
not <br>
>> offer 12 services, but instead they have 12 links to 12 different
pages<br>
>> full<br>
>> of marketing fluff. As you read each of the pages in an attempt to wrap<br>
>> your<br>
>> mind around what they are offering as individually packaged services <br>
>> you're<br>
>> left with more questions than answers. So again, what the hell?<br>
>><br>
>> Here's an example. Their "Application Security" service page
does not<br>
>> contain a description about a Web Application Security service. In
fact, <br>
>> it<br>
>> doesn't even contain a description about a System Software/Application<br>
>> security service. Instead it contains a super high level, super vague
and<br>
>> fluffy description that covers a really general idea of
"Application" <br>
>> security services. When you really read into it you find out that
their<br>
>> Application Security service should be broken down into multiple<br>
>> different<br>
>> defined service offerings. <br>
>><br>
>> Even more frustrating is that their Application Security service is a<br>
>> consulting service and that they have a separate service offering
called<br>
>> Consulting. When you read the description for Consulting, it is also <br>
>> vague<br>
>> and mostly useless, but does cover the "potential" for
Application<br>
>> Security.<br>
>><br>
>> So, trying to learn anything about Cybertrust from their web page is
like <br>
>> trying to pull teeth out of a possessed chicken. We decided that we
would<br>
>> move on and call Cybertrust to see what we could get out of them with
a<br>
>> conversation. That proved to be a real pain in the ass too as their <br>
>> website<br>
>> doesn't list any telephone numbers. We ended up calling verizon and
after<br>
>> talking to 4 people we finally found a Cybertrust representative.<br>
>><br>
>> At last, a human being that could provide us with useful information
and <br>
>> answers to our questions about their services. We did receive about
2mb<br>
>> of<br>
>> materials from our contact at Cybertrust, but the materials were all<br>
>> marketing fluff, totally useless. That being said, our conversation
with <br>
>> the<br>
>> representative gave us a very clear understanding of how Cybertrust<br>
>> delivers<br>
>> there services. In all honesty, we were not all that impressed.<br>
>><br>
>> Cybertrust does perform their own Vulnerability Research and Development
<br>
>> (or<br>
>> so we were told) under the umbrella of ICSAlabs which they own.
Usually<br>
>> we'd<br>
>> say that this is great because that research is often used to augment<br>
>> services and enhance overall service quality. With respect to
Cybertrust, <br>
>> we<br>
>> couldn't find out what they were doing with their research. They just<br>
>> told<br>
>> us that they don't release advisories and then refused to tell us what<br>
>> they <br>
>> did with the research.<br>
>><br>
>> When we asked them about their services and testing methodologies, we<br>
>> were<br>
>> first told that they couldn't discuss that. We were told that their <br>
>> methodologies were confidential. But after a bit of Social Engineering<br>
>> and<br>
>> sweet talking we were able to get more information...<br>
>><br>
>> As it turns out, the majority of the Cybertrust services rely on what <br>
>> they<br>
>> say are proprietary automated scanners which were developed in-house.<br>
>> Their<br>
>> methodology is to run the automated scanners against a specific target
or<br>
>> set of targets, and then to pass the results to a seasoned
professional. <br>
>> That professional then verifies the results via manual testing and<br>
>> produces<br>
>> a report that contains the vetted results.<br>
>><br>
>> This methodology doesn't really offer any depth and doesn't do much to
<br>
>> raise<br>
>> the proverbial security bar. In fact, it is only slightly better than<br>
>> running a Qualys scan, changing the wording of the report, and
delivering<br>
>> that. Quality methodologies should contain no more than 20% automated <br>
>> testing and no less than 80% manual testing. Vulnerability discovery<br>
>> should<br>
>> be done via manual testing, not just via automated testing.<br>
>><br>
>> In defense of Cybertrust, they did say that they would test in
accordance <br>
>> with the customers requirements. They also did say that if the
customer<br>
>> wanted 100% manual testing that they would do it. If they want 100%<br>
>> automated "rubber stamp of approval" testing they would do
that too. <br>
>> Saying<br>
>> it is a lot different than doing it though and we weren't impressed
with<br>
>> their standard/default testing methodology as previously mentioned.<br>
>><br>
>> It is important to note that Cybertrust is also a full service
security <br>
>> provider. They offer a wide range of services from supporting secure<br>
>> product<br>
>> development services, to security testing, and even forensic services.<br>
>> With<br>
>> that said, their services do not seem to be anything special. In fact,
<br>
>> they<br>
>> seem to be just about average short of their horrible website and<br>
>> overwhelming marketing fluff.<br>
>><br>
>> It is our recommendation that you choose a different provider if you
are <br>
>> looking for well defined, high quality services. Cybertrust is cloaked
in<br>
>> a<br>
>> thick layer of marketing fluff and frankly doesn't seem to be very
easy<br>
>> to<br>
>> work with. That being said, they were also not easy to review. If you <br>
>> disagree with this post or have worked with Cybertrust in the past,
then<br>
>> please leave us a comment. We're going to give Cybertrust a
"C" but if<br>
>> you<br>
>> can convince us that they deserve a different grade then we'll revise
our <br>
>> opinion.<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks for reading.<br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Posted By secreview to Professional IT Security Providers -
Exposed at<br>
>> 12/19/2007 07:32:00 PM<br>
>> _______________________________________________ <br>
>> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<br>
>> Charter: <a
href="http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html">http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html</a><br>
>> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - <a href="http://secunia.com/">http://secunia.com/</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<br>
> Charter: <a href="http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html">http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html</a><br>
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - <a href="http://secunia.com/">http://secunia.com/</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<br>
Charter: <a href="http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html">http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html</a><br>
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - <a href="http://secunia.com/">http://secunia.com/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>