Cool Solutions

True Open Standards Aren’t Single Vendor Affairs


August 25, 2010 1:57 pm





guest post — Brian Singer, security solutions marketing manager, Identity & Security, Novell

Recently, a privately held log management vendor, LogLogic, announced that they were interested in having their proprietary log transportation and storage protocol become an industry standard. This is clearly a self-serving power grab with very little substance behind it. LogLogic is doing nothing more than taking a proprietary protocol they have created and attempting to co-opt industry attention by claiming they are making it an open standard.

Novell welcomes open standards and has a long history of working with other vendors to create and support open standards. Standards are not created overnight, and take a lot more than a creative acronym to pull off. Developing an open standard requires buy-in from other industry players with significant marketshare. Last I checked, LogLogic was not exactly the market leader in SIEM. Perhaps, they are thinking, their standard is such a feat of engineering that other SIEM vendors will clamor to adopt it? Not likely as the other large players in the SIEM industry have invested significant sums in optimizing their log collection and storage protocols for their particular architectures. Any amount of re-architecting around the LogLogic protocol would take years and give LogLogic such an advantage that no vendor in their right mind would pursue it.

The fact is, true industry standards exist or are already being worked on. Syslog has been around for a long time, for all its perceived faults. There are two emerging efforts – XDAS by The Open Group and CEE by MITRE – that are working hard to create cross-platform, cloud-interoperable standards that have a real chance of being adopted by the entire industry. Novell is directly involved in both efforts. Both of these are true, non-proprietary, open standards that address forward looking challenges. If LogLogic was truly serious about working with the vendor community to create a real open standard, they would contribute to these projects rather than simply trying to spin their own, proprietary standard into an open standard.

0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories: Expert Views, General, PR Blog


Disclaimer: This content is not supported by Micro Focus. It was contributed by a community member and is published "as is." It seems to have worked for at least one person, and might work for you. But please be sure to test it thoroughly before using it in a production environment.

1 Comment

  1. Brian,
    Great headline. We could not agree more. As you say, Standards require multiple vendor participation, and they do not come about over night.
    While it is true that there are standards in other areas like CEE, our Universal Lossless Data Protcol is about log data TRANSPORT, not the format of the logs. Novell has a long history in working on standards and are to be praised for their work on XDAS and CEE, which appears to have been first proposed in 1998.
    Your aspersions aside, we are very interested in a non-proprietary open standards, and look forward to working with other members of the community.

    For more information on our position on this, see: