Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google to buy Wiz for $32B

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 951 posts

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#661

Post by [deleted] »

almosthere wrote: post #593
ryanSrich wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is wild to me. As someone in security, Wiz is definitely one of the whales.

Same here, I guess it's the circles you run. I just went to their homepage and I have no idea what they do. I already have CI/CD, code, etc.. "securing" it seems like, use aws secret stores? In other words, their webpage is not telling me anything. Companies like these, always feel like instead of having a useful product, they hired useful networks of people to "spread the word" and sell sell sell to your network. Ap…

[deleted]

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#663

Post by myth_drannon »

alephnerd wrote: post #513
manquer wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not so mossad-y. Would we (i.e. anyone not in the intelligence space) know how intelligence service-y software would look like ? . Aren't all such organizations trained and designed to be inconspicuous and in places we are unlikely to expect.

Mossad aren't the guys doing cyber ops in Israel. They're suave arsim (how else can you blend in Beirut or Tehran). Also, if you've worked with Israeli government cybersecurity teams, they aren't much different in caliber from the kind you'd find at the NSA, GCHQ, or Netherlands.

I think you just watched Asi Cohen skit https://youtu.be/bN-en_7KGT8?si=xqhHaa9lBXpjntEq

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#664

Post by marcus0x62 »

nujabe wrote: post #642
marcus0x62 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a problem with Unit 8200 alumni, you’re going to have a difficult time buying commercially available security products. Palo Alto Networks, Armis, Checkpoint, and many others were either founded by or otherwise have former 8200 folks on staff. Then there’s crowdstrike, founded by a Russian. Or Fortinet, which was founded by Ken Xie (born in Beijing.) I guess you could base your entire security stack on F…

Delete

> The founders of CrowdStrike—George Kurtz, Dmitri Alperovitch, and Gregg Marston—do not have publicly documented personal connections to Israel. That's the first claim of yours I faield to verify so I won't bother with the rest.

I realize reading is a very difficult skill to master, but maybe -- just maybe -- you couldn't verify that "claim" because I never made it.

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#665

Post by zifpanachr23 »

diggan wrote: post #276
allturtles wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know anything about cloud VMs, but I'm confused about how this is possible. Wouldn't determining whether you are HIPAA complaint depend on auditing all kinds of application details about how information flows through the system and how authentication and authorization are done? How could this be validated statically by looking at cloud VM config? Is Wiz doing some kind of AI magic over your whole codebase? I…

> I am sure I am misunderstanding something, but I'm not sure what. You're missing that a lot of "security" is in reality just a bunch of check-boxes for a form that someone asks you to fill out. The security you need to really think about is outside of those checkboxes, and it seems like Wiz is not for this type of security, but the former.

Exactly

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#666

Post by ramraj07 »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #545
ryanSrich wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're in security and you haven't at least heard of Wiz, I have doubts about what you actually do. I'm not saying you have to be a CSPM expert, but not even hearing about Wiz, when they are the largest CSPM, is somewhat concerning.

> If you're in security and you haven't at least heard of Wiz, I have doubts about what you actually do. IT security a very wide field. For example, a lot of positions in IT security are actually about compliance (i.e. lots of documentation), and ensuring the rollout of all necessary application patches in the whole company.

I know diabetologists in India who didn't hear about Ozempic till late 2024.

Sometimes the simpler explanation is the correct one.

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#667

Post by trinityST »

nujabe wrote: post #642
marcus0x62 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a problem with Unit 8200 alumni, you’re going to have a difficult time buying commercially available security products. Palo Alto Networks, Armis, Checkpoint, and many others were either founded by or otherwise have former 8200 folks on staff. Then there’s crowdstrike, founded by a Russian. Or Fortinet, which was founded by Ken Xie (born in Beijing.) I guess you could base your entire security stack on F…

Delete

the comment stated that crowdstrike is founded by a Russian, not by Israel.

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#668

Post by marcus0x62 »

zifpanachr23 wrote: post #657
marcus0x62 wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m honestly not sure what your point, if any, is.

That the security software industry is kind of full of shit sometimes is I think what they were getting at.

Based on the exceptional level of ignorance and outright delusion in this thread, I'd rather not speculate. Easily 1/3 of the discussion is mired in conspiracy theories about Israel, and another 10 - 20% are people who's comments can be boiled down to "you know, I've never heard of this product/company/industry before, but, by God, the world needs to hear my hot take."

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#669

Post by zifpanachr23 »

xnx wrote: post #66

Is enterprise security software like consumer antivirus software (i.e. unnecessary (or even harmful) if you know what you're doing)?

I think that is obviously the case.

That being said, one of the reasons these things sell is that the majority of people sitting behind computers in large enterprises absolutely DO NOT have any idea what they were doing.

Once you get to a certain scale, the idea that you can "just be competent" and maintain high standards and configure your boxes the right way the first time every time btecomes logistically impossible.

Liability and insurance also is a big concern for large companies. The ability to blame somebody else for your security failings and check off all the silly boxes is pretty valuable. I'm sure consumer windows antivirus software would become a big hit again if you were for all intents and purposes being legally strong armed into purchasing it.

Re: Google to buy Wiz for $32B

#670

Post by lol768 »

decimalenough wrote: post #619
bfeynman wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is insane. AWS has more complicated policies, GCP literally lacks ability to even have easy security posture in many cases.

That's quite the claim, can you provide an example? GCP is permissive out of the box and things like the Compute Engine service account having the basic Editor role by default is a bit of a footgun, but they're trivially turned off.

I'm afraid it's something I need to agree with.

So many areas where resource-based conditions just do not work with particular GCP product offerings and you're forced to give out much broader access than you should be giving out. It's half-arsed and prevents you implementing PoLP.

AWS has a steeper learning curve here, but I've never been unable to constrain down e.g. access to an SNS topic in the way I want to.

Post reply on HN