Analyst Reports Forrester 2016 Automated Malware Analysis Wave

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS
The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware

Analysis, Q2 2016
Tools And Technology: The Security Architecture And Operations Playbook
by Jeff Pollard and Kelley Mak
April 21, 2016
Why Read This Report
Key Takeaways
In our 36-criteria evaluation of automated

malware analysis providers, we identified the 11
most significant ones Blue Coat, Check Point,
Cisco, Cyphort, Fidelis Cybersecurity, FireEye,
Fortinet, Intel Security, Palo Alto Networks,
Lastline, and Trend Micro and researched,
analyzed, and scored them. This report shows
how each provider measures up and helps
security and risk (S&R) professionals make the
right choice.
Portfolio Vendors Lead While Two Startups

See Traction
Forresters research uncovered a market in
which Palo Alto Networks, Check Point, Blue
Coat, Cyphort, Trend Micro, Lastline, FireEye,
and Intel Security lead the pack. Fidelis
Cybersecurity and Cisco offer competitive
options. Fortinet lags behind.
S&R Pros Are Looking For Usability And
Integrations
The automated malware analysis market is
growing because more security professionals
see malware analysis as a way to address their
top challenges. This market growth is in large
part due to the fact that security and risk pros
increasingly trust automated malware analysis
providers to act as their highest fidelity alert,
trusting them beyond other security technology.
Flexibility And Delivery Models Are Key
Differentiators
As signature-based technologies become
outdated and less effective, improved flexibility
will dictate which providers will lead the pack.
Vendors that can provide SaaS, on-premises,
and hosted solutions position themselves to
successfully deliver scalable and adaptable
solutions to their customers.
FORRESTER.COM
The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

by Jeff Pollard and Kelley Mak
with Stephanie Balaouras, Josh Blackborow, and Peggy Dostie
April 21, 2016
Table Of Contents
2 Automated Malware Analysis Is A Necessity
In Your Security Stack
Technical Complexity Clouds The
Differentiation Of AMA Technologies
3 Automated Malware Analysis Evaluation
Overview
Evaluated Vendors And Inclusion Criteria
Notes & Resources

Forrester conducted lab-based product
evaluations in November 2015 and interviewed
11 vendor and 33 user companies, including:
Blue Coat, Check Point, Cisco, Cyphort, Fidelis
Cybersecurity, FireEye, Fortinet, Intel Security,
Lastline, Palo Alto Networks, and Trend Micro.
Related Research Documents

Forresters Targeted-Attack Hierarchy Of Needs:
Assess Your Advanced Capabilities
6 Vendor Profiles
Leaders
Strong Performers
Contenders
12 Supplemental Material
The Forrester Wave: SaaS Web Content

Security, Q2 2015
TechRadar: Zero Trust Network Threat
Mitigation Technology, Q1 2015
Forrester Research, Inc., 60 Acorn Park Drive, Cambridge, MA 02140 USA

+1 617-613-6000 | Fax: +1 617-613-5000 | forrester.com
2016 Forrester Research, Inc. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. Forrester,
Technographics, Forrester Wave, RoleView, TechRadar, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester
Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Unauthorized copying or
distributing is a violation of copyright law. Citations@forrester.com or +1 866-367-7378
April 21, 2016

Automated Malware Analysis Is A Necessity In Your Security Stack

Despite significant investments in the signature-based defenses of todays network, email, and
endpoint security solutions, since 2010, these solutions have been ineffective and inefficient against
the sheer volume of evolving and evasive malware. S&R pros desperate to find a way to identify
and analyze the growing number of unknown security threats at scale have turned to a new class of
security technology: automated malware analysis (AMA). These tools have transformed the specific
skill sets of manual practitioners into an automated technology solution that uses static and dynamic
analysis methods to detect existing malware while also discovering brand new exploit tools. In 2016,
these technologies have shifted from possible to necessary investments in a security stack designed to
prevent the known and detect the unknown.1 Those investments see reward through:
Generation of the most important alerts in the environment of any technology. Forrester
clients noted that AMA technology generated the most important alerts of any technology in their
environment.2 By focusing on actual execution of malware samples and watching behaviors, AMA
solutions provide higher fidelity alerts and earlier in the attack life cycle. This means security teams
can save time by prioritizing the results of AMA alerts over other technologies.
Organic threat intelligence created by real attacks on the organization. Since these
technologies extract and analyze objects that traverse the network, email, and endpoint for
behaviors, an organization now has a source for specific threat intelligence derived from its actual
traffic. This intelligence includes nonunique attacks targeting large numbers of potential victims
down to specific and unique attacks against their organization. AMA technologies offer the
definitive set of organic threat intelligence that an organization requires.
Incidents driven by concrete analysis results, not wild hunts based on anomalies.
Deconstruction of objects inside malware analysis sandbox environments can provide S&R pros
concrete clues and information about threats and what to look for next. For example, capturing
command and control addresses can allow packet capture sessions, or finding a mutex leads to an
endpoint indicator enabling a sweep of the enterprise for infected endpoints. Details from automated
malware analysis solutions provide specific feedback criteria for further exploration or enforcement.
Technical Complexity Clouds The Differentiation Of AMA Technologies
Due to varying approaches within the dynamic malware analysis space, S&R pros considering
investment, or reinvestment, will find obtuse messaging and ambiguous explanations about how
technologies work and why one approach is better than others. Get ready to dust off old knowledge, or
develop some new areas of expertise like:
Visibility differs when using virtualization versus emulation. Each approach has technical merits
and limitations. Teams should consider the widest net possible as key criteria. A solution that relies
only on virtualization can analyze objects quickly but could lose visibility if malware attempts to
2016 Forrester Research, Inc. Unauthorized copying or distributing is a violation of copyright law.
Citations@forrester.com or +1 866-367-7378
April 21, 2016

interact directly with hardware. Emulating systems provide maximum visibility but can slow down
when analyzing malware that leverages interpreted languages like Python, and pays a performance
penalty overall.
What it blocks is just as important as whether it blocks. If a sample is truly brand new, using
techniques never seen before, no technology will block it. This fundamental fact manages to get
left out of vendor messaging. AMA technologies can and do block malware based on signature or
reputation, but the shiny debut of a sophisticated attack will always require time to analyze and get
delivered to end users. Its important to remember and communicate that silver bullets dont exist;
remember to plan for failure.
Visibility of a seemingly infinite attack surface challenges defenders. More coverage of an
attack surface equals higher detection possibility. If a technology cant analyze certain file types, it
cant find unknown malware there. If corporate assets are a heterogeneous mix of Windows, Apple,
and Android, then the solution picked must have the ability to analyze all those types or it isnt a fit.
Avoiding self-created gaps in coverage takes priority over deep analysis of heaps, stacks, sprays,
ROPs, and NOPs.
Detection efficacy doesnt dictate superiority of technology. Letting efficacy dictate purchase
begins the process with a flawed premise ending with dissatisfaction. Detection efficacy from
appliances can vary. Ransomware authors will vary the file types they deliver to exploit flaws and
evade detection. Seeing more is better, and better detection of those types is great, but usability,
integrations, and flexibility should rank equal or higher. Enhancing detection capability is far easier
for a vendor compared with redesigning a user interface since one impacts customers indirectly
and the other directly.
Automated Malware Analysis Evaluation Overview

To assess the state of the automated malware analysis market and see how the vendors stack up
against each other, Forrester evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of top automated malware
analysis vendors. After examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert
interviews, we developed a comprehensive set of evaluation criteria. We evaluated vendors against 36
criteria, which we grouped into three high-level buckets:
Current offering. We evaluated the technologies based on their ability to analyze and execute
malware, manual malware analysis capabilities, solution deployment model and architecture, threat
intelligence and technology integrations, and reporting and administration functionality. We also
interviewed vendor customer references to get feedback on their satisfaction with the technology
and the vendor.
Strategy. We evaluated vendors on product strategy and corporate strategy to understand
technology direction and corporate focus.
April 21, 2016

Market presence. We evaluated vendors on their current customer base, revenue, revenue growth,
vendor size, and technology partners.
Evaluated Vendors And Inclusion Criteria
Forrester included 11 vendors in the assessment: Blue Coat, Check Point, Cisco, Cyphort, Fidelis
Cybersecurity, FireEye, Fortinet, Intel Security, Lastline, Palo Alto, and Trend Micro. Each of these
vendors is able to (see Figure 1):
Utilize network-based dynamic analysis methods to automatically detect malware.
Technologies needed to have a product that was network-based and performed dynamic analysis
that extended beyond signatures and reputation lists providing scores, indicators, and behavioral
information for security operations teams.
Inspect network traffic (HTTP). Since most malware requires network traffic for delivery or
instructions, technologies needed to inspect traffic and objects sent via HTTP.
Inspect email traffic (SMTP). With spearphishing emails commonly seen as a primary method of
infection for the most sophisticated attacks, the ability to inspect objects extracted from SMTP is
critical. This offers visibility without direct integration with email servers, providing a
straightforward deployment.
Generate mindshare with Forresters clients. The vendor must have a significant market share or
come up frequently in client conversations and inquiries.
April 21, 2016

FIGURE 1 Evaluated Vendors: Vendor Information And Selection Criteria

Vendor name
Evaluated in
Blue Coat
Q4 2015
Check Point
Q4 2015
Cisco
Q4 2015
Cyphort
Q4 2015
Fidelis Cybersecurity
Q4 2015
FireEye
Q4 2015
Fortinet
Q4 2015
Intel Security
Q4 2015
Lastline
Q4 2015
Palo Alto Networks
Q4 2015
Trend Micro
Q4 2015
Vendor selection criteria
The vendors solution utilizes network-based dynamic analysis methods to automatically detect malware.
The vendors solution inspects network traffic (HTTP).
The vendors solution inspects email traffic (SMTP).
The vendor generates mindshare with Forrester clients.
April 21, 2016

Vendor Profiles
This evaluation of the automated malware analysis market is intended to be a starting point only.
We encourage clients to view detailed product evaluations and adapt criteria weightings to fit their
individual needs through the Forrester Wave Excel-based vendor comparison tool (see Figure 2).
FIGURE 2 Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 16
Challengers Contenders
Strong
Strong
Performers
Leaders
Cyphort
Lastline
Palo Alto
Networks
Check
Point
Intel Security
Fidelis
Cybersecurity
Cisco
Fortinet
Current
offering
Blue Coat
FireEye
Trend
Micro
Go to Forrester.com to
download the Forrester
Wave tool for more
detailed product
evaluations, feature
comparisons, and
customizable rankings.
Market presence
Weak
Weak
Strategy
Strong
April 21, 2016

Forresters
Weighting
Blue Coat
Check Point
Cisco
Cyphort
Fidelis Cybersecurity
FireEye
Fortinet
Intel Security
Lastline
Palo Alto Networks
Trend Micro
FIGURE 2 Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 16 (Cont.)
CURRENT OFFERING
Analysis techniques
Manual malware analysis
Deployment model
Architecture
Encrypted traffic inspection
Threat intelligence
Intelligence network
Integrations
Reporting
Administration
Customer references
50%
25%
3%
10%
10%
2%
10%
5%
10%
10%
5%
10%
3.59
4.21
3.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
3.00
2.00
5.00
3.00
3.00
4.00
3.70
3.77
3.00
3.00
5.00
5.00
2.00
5.00
3.67
3.00
5.00
4.00
3.14
2.61
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
2.00
3.00
4.33
1.00
1.00
3.00
3.70
3.65
3.00
3.00
5.00
0.00
3.00
3.00
5.00
3.00
5.00
4.00
3.51
2.58
1.00
3.00
3.00
5.00
5.00
3.00
4.33
3.00
5.00
5.00
3.28
4.50
3.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
3.67
3.00
3.00
3.00
2.67
2.65
3.00
3.00
3.00
5.00
1.00
2.00
1.67
3.00
5.00
3.00
3.87
4.55
5.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
2.00
4.33
3.00
5.00
3.00
4.19
4.41
3.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
5.00
3.00
5.00
3.00
5.00
3.00
3.85
3.32
3.00
3.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
3.00
4.33
3.00
5.00
4.00
3.22
3.59
3.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
2.00
3.00
2.33
3.00
5.00
4.00
STRATEGY
Product strategy
Corporate strategy
Cost
50%
70%
30%
0%
4.18
4.25
4.00
0.00
4.18
4.25
4.00
0.00
3.15
3.00
3.50
0.00
3.83
3.75
4.00
0.00
3.33
3.25
3.50
0.00
3.98
3.75
4.50
0.00
2.35
2.50
2.00
0.00
3.30
3.00
4.00
0.00
3.18
3.25
3.00
0.00
4.03
4.25
3.50
0.00
4.15
4.00
4.50
0.00
MARKET PRESENCE
Installed base
Product revenue
Revenue growth
Employees
Technology partners
0%
20%
20%
20%
20%
10%
2.87
3.33
3.00
3.00
2.50
5.00
3.53
3.67
4.00
4.00
3.50
5.00
2.77
3.33
2.00
2.00
4.00
5.00
2.23
2.67
1.00
5.00
1.50
2.00
2.45
3.00
3.00
3.00
2.00
2.50
4.00
5.00
5.00
3.00
4.50
5.00
3.15
5.00
3.00
3.00
3.50
2.50
3.77
3.33
4.00
5.00
4.00
5.00
2.37
2.33
1.00
5.00
2.00
3.00
4.30
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.00
5.00
3.83
4.67
4.00
4.00
4.50
4.00
All scores are based on a scale of 0 (weak) to 5 (strong).
Leaders
Palo Alto Networks pushes automated malware analysis into the NGFW feature stack. First
released in 2012, WildFire offers existing Palo Alto Networks customers dynamic malware analysis
as a bundled add-on to the next-generation firewall (NGFW) stack, making deployment simple.
Use of cloud-based analysis eases integration and minimizes additional hardware requirements.
Enterprises with privacy or data residency concerns should consider whether the cloud delivery
model makes sense. Palo Alto Networks provides on-premises analysis as an option, but this
April 21, 2016

removes the simplicity of deployment and sizing. WildFire has a wide array of supported file types,
including Android APKs for dynamic analysis, and supports many threat intelligence import and
export formats.
Palo Alto Networks strategy going forward is comprehensive, covering prevention as well as
detection and response, and its development of AutoFocus to leverage threat intelligence looks
promising. Some limitations exist specific to types of files analyzed and available operating
systems. Organizations with existing Palo Alto Networks appliances deployed should consider
adding WildFire to licensing, and organizations with less sophisticated security teams will find
working with the technology straightforward.
Check Points AMA offering analyzes malware and innovates with interception. Customers
can add cloud-based analysis capability or on-premises analysis depending on preference.
Check Points overall philosophy and strategy is targeted toward prevention, and underlying this
approach is a strong technical offering with intriguing features. Check Point has deep dynamic
analysis capability acquired through its purchase of Hyperwise in February 2015. Perhaps the most
impressive element of Check Points malware analysis approach is the ability to capture an email
attachment, analyze it, and render the content for the end user or security team while the malware
is mitigated.
Check Point is the only vendor in the Forrester Wave with this unique email capability, setting it
apart from competitors. However, Check Point lacks coverage for Mac OS X, and Android analysis
requires a separate purchase of Check Points Mobile Threat Prevention product. The user interface
is not as informative for understanding malware behavior and its risk, compared with competitors.
Blue Coat integrates malware analysis into a strong investigation-focused suite. Blue Coat
continues its reinvention after private equity acquisition by building a security suite that focuses on
the elements of instrumentation important to security teams investigating threats. The sandboxing
component of this includes robust malware analysis capabilities and flexibility via scripting that
allows security practitioners to extend sandbox capabilities with other tools. By leveraging delivery
mechanisms from proxies, packet capture, and external integrations, Blue Coat can receive objects
in multiple ways native to its portfolio and via third-party API-based integrations.
Existing clients of Blue Coat will find adding automated malware analysis capability requires
hardware sizing, purchase, and licensing adjustments, but an easy deployment and integration.
Analysis results arent as easy to interpret as those of competitors, and Blue Coat requires multiple
appliances to get the full value out of the solution. Security teams looking to extend their current
Blue Coat investment and who are looking to add sandboxing, customize analysis capabilities, and
focus on life-cycle investigations will find the technology valuable.
Cyphort approaches analysis differently in both messaging and technology. The second
of the Forrester Waves nonportfolio leaders, Cyphort has built an analytic offering focused on
behaviors and machine learning rather than pure malware analysis. Strong object analysis across
April 21, 2016

Windows, Apple, and Android operating systems and object types provides a comprehensive
solution. Integrations with other security technologies provide capabilities for object analysis across
numerous delivery mechanisms. The technologys clear explanations of malware behavior make it
easy to use for both experienced personnel and newer personnel unfamiliar with malware analysis.
Cyphorts approach attempts to differentiate it from traditional sandboxes, but digging into specifics
behind its behavioral-based detection and machine learning in comparison to competitors can be
difficult for customers. The impact that approach has on detection efficacy and malware analysis
results can vary across clients and deployments and is something that potential customers should
evaluate during the purchase process with a programmatic proof of concept. A strong go-to-market
strategy relying on partners with dedicated account teams makes purchasing simple, with Cyphort
fitting well with clients that want standalone innovative vendors and deployment flexibility.
Trend Micro goes deep with dynamic analysis offerings. Deep Discoverys sandbox element
extends Trend Micros antivirus heuristics and static analysis feature set into a comprehensive
approach to security visibility. The solution requires physical or virtualized hardware for analysis
with no hosted cloud model provided by Trend Micro. Trend Micros dynamic analysis covers
the basics of Windows-specific analysis, supported file types, and employs many anti-evasion
techniques. Trend Micro also provides the ability for customers to load their custom images as
analysis environments. Application, OS, and some hardware-level analysis grant solid visibility into
samples and their behavior.
Portfolio integration within Trend Micro is straightforward, and Trend Micros continued investment
in threat investigation across products is appealing. Trend Micros acquisition of TippingPoint
gives it more skin in the network security game, but its long-term effect on the automated malware
analysis solution remains unclear. However, a limited web services API isnt impressive compared
with those of competitors, and the solution lacks integrations with third parties. Customers with
basic requirements looking for network visibility and ease of use should consider Trend Micro.
Lastline builds its research pedigree into it dynamic analysis, and it shows. Experience years
ago building Anubis and Wepawet give the Lastline founders and team an excellent background in
understanding how to detect malware. It is one of only two leaders that offer a standalone solution
instead of a portfolio-based add-on. Focusing on instrumenting hardware and software gives
Lastline the ability to detect evasive malware and exploits in both software and hardware. A clean
user interface, clear behavior scoring, and explanations make the technology easy to use. Lastline
offers a cloud-based or on-premises solution, giving flexibility in deployment, and a robust API
makes integrations a priority.
Where Lastline excels in its current offering for detection and visibility, the go-to-market strategy
and OEM partnerships muddle client experiences in working with them. Multiple OEM partnerships
mean clients have little reason to go direct and creates confusion for prospects. Client feedback
April 21, 2016

mentioned concerns with high employee turnover and support responsiveness. Those looking for
an easy user interface and a nonportfolio offering, and who are willing to sort through OEM versus
direct challenges, will find Lastline a solid technology with potential strategic setbacks.
FireEyes origin and development of the malware analysis space is clear. The original and
most successful commercial sandbox enters the Forrester Wave in an interesting space as its
offering grows with managed and professional services, endpoint, and more. With unique detection
capabilities especially at the network and object level, FireEye is one of the only entries to replay
the network session inside the dynamic analysis environment. This functionality, combined with
strong exploit detection, led FireEye to numerous discoveries of malware over the years, and its
value is hard to replicate for competitors, but clear to customers. Lack of a cloud environment for
analysis makes FireEye an on-premises and appliance-only offering.
FireEyes success is one of its major weaknesses, as the appliance-only offering makes scaling and
sizing difficult. Separate network, email, file, and direct submission appliances create a product
set where analysis environment is the same, but the extraction method is not. For clients without
concerns about the number and different types of appliances and who prefer to work with an
original innovator in a space, FireEye makes sense as a potential partner. Careful consideration
should be given to FireEyes evolution as a vendor, with malware detection still an important, but
not only, aspect of its strategy.
Intel Security brings strong CPU-based detection and analysis. Perhaps not surprisingly, Intel
excels at CPU-based detections and assembly-level detection capabilities with advanced threat
defense (ATD). Intels solution instruments below the operating system API that leads to substantial
visibility into evasive malware. Intel also offers a user interactive mode that allows an analyst to
work directly with the sample while its in the dynamic analysis environment. Integrations with the
broader Intel platform offer multiple ways to send files for analysis, and its management with ePO
makes it easy for enterprises that already use Intel Security products.
However, Intels divestiture of its NGFW and email gateway will limit the traffic inspection
capabilities of the portfolio in the future, which will rely on strategic partnerships. The user interface
isnt the simplest, but Intel Security offers differentiated capabilities for an experienced analyst or
reverse engineer, which customers with sophisticated teams will find intriguing. Long-term strategic
planning around Intel Security and its divestiture and acquisition strategy should take place, as the
implications to ATD through the context of the Intel offering in a portfolio purchase could cause
issues in the future.
Strong Performers
Fidelis Cybersecurity adds value to dynamic analysis with analytics. Fidelis Cybersecurity
features capable dynamic analysis and a product suite focused on investigation across network
and endpoints. Multiple integrations within the Fidelis Cybersecurity security portfolio, as well
as third parties, give flexibility to customers regarding how they deploy technologies inside the
10
April 21, 2016

environment. Fidelis Cybersecurity offers physical and virtual appliances for on-premises or cloudbased deployments but doesnt offer hosted analysis capabilities, meaning clients will have to think
about sizing and scale when building a solution.
Fidelis Cybersecurity suffers when it comes to dynamic analysis environments, operating systems,
and applications. The inability to analyze Mac OS X and Android malware will prove problematic
to heterogeneous IT environments with multiple surface areas. Fidelis Cybersecurity does provide
sophisticated enhancements to the dynamic analysis capabilities it lacks with solid network
analytics and signatures presented well in its user interface. Customers with an appetite for an
investigation-oriented platform who value the use of network signature detection should consider
Fidelis Cybersecurity due to the user interface and sophisticated signature set.
Cisco integrates ThreatGrid into the Advanced Malware Protection offering. With a cloud
and on-premises offering, Cisco proves itself once again capable of integrating acquisitions
quickly by combining dynamic analysis capabilities of ThreatGrid with the legacy Sourcefire
FireAMP line of network and endpoint tools. API-based external integrations plus a comprehensive
internal portfolio allow multiple mechanisms to send objects to ThreatGrid. The ability to interact
with objects as they execute is a strength of the Cisco offering, something advanced users will
appreciate compared with fully automated solutions. A good user interface with a robust API gives
flexibility in reporting, administration, and customization. Artifacts of analysis are also available by
API query.
Unfortunately, the primary drawback of ThreatGrid comes in its limited support for Windows
environments, with only Windows XP and Windows 7 supported. The inability to dynamically
analyze Mac OS X and Android and a limited set of applications available in each dynamic
environment make the offering quite specific regarding coverage. ThreatGrid also has limited
instrumentation beyond the operating system at a hardware level. Customers seeking Windowsspecific advanced detection capabilities at the software level and a full featured API should
evaluate ThreatGrid, as well as Cisco customers exploring the AMP stack in its entirety.
Contenders
Fortinet sticks to a strategy of portfolio appliances with diverse feature sets. The overall
Fortinet approach of integrating various features of one-time specific technologies works well for
them, and that remains true in the automated malware analysis space. Ability to instrument email,
endpoint, and network give multiple options for file analysis, and a straightforward user interface
with similar functionality to other Fortinet technologies make interacting with the technology easy
for users. Fortinets dynamic analysis offering is limited in operating systems supported (Windows
XP and Windows 7), file types supported, manual analysis, and threat intelligence support.
Heavy reliance on other elements of the Fortinet suite for signature, reputation, and static analysis
also make the FortiSandbox offering dependent on other technology, so that it wont be an
isolated purchase, but part of an overall Fortinet solution already deployed. Customers familiar
11
April 21, 2016

with Fortinet technology, fans of its licensing and user interface, and those not focused on deep
analysis capabilities or diverse analysis environments will find Fortinet straightforward and useful in
a Fortinet-based ecosystem.
Engage With An Analyst

Gain greater confidence in your decisions by working with Forrester thought leaders to apply our
research to your specific business and technology initiatives.
Analyst Inquiry
Analyst Advisory
Ask a question related to our research; a

Forrester analyst will help you put it into
practice and take the next step. Schedule
a 30-minute phone session with the analyst
or opt for a response via email.
Put research into practice with in-depth

analysis of your specific business and
technology challenges. Engagements
include custom advisory calls, strategy
days, workshops, speeches, and webinars.
Learn more about inquiry, including tips for

getting the most out of your discussion.
Learn about interactive advisory sessions

and how we can support your initiatives.
Supplemental Material
Online Resource
The online version of Figure 2 is an Excel-based vendor comparison tool that provides detailed product
evaluations and customizable rankings.
Data Sources Used In This Forrester Wave
Forrester used a combination of four data sources to assess the strengths and weaknesses of each
solution. We evaluated the vendors participating in this Forrester Wave, in part, using materials that
they provided to us by September 21, 2015:
Vendor surveys. Forrester surveyed vendors on their capabilities as they relate to the evaluation
criteria. Once we analyzed the completed vendor surveys, we conducted vendor calls where
necessary to gather details of vendor qualifications.
12
April 21, 2016

Product demos. We asked vendors to conduct demonstrations of their products functionality. We

used findings from these product demos to validate details of each vendors product capabilities.
Customer reference calls. To validate product and vendor qualifications, Forrester also conducted
reference calls with three of each vendors current customers.
The Forrester Wave Methodology
We conduct primary research to develop a list of vendors that meet our criteria to be evaluated in this
market. From that initial pool of vendors, we then narrow our final list. We choose these vendors based
on: 1) product fit; 2) customer success; and 3) Forrester client demand. We eliminate vendors that have
limited customer references and products that dont fit the scope of our evaluation.
After examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert interviews, we develop
the initial evaluation criteria. To evaluate the vendors and their products against our set of criteria,
we gather details of product qualifications through a combination of lab evaluations, questionnaires,
demos, and/or discussions with client references. We send evaluations to the vendors for their review,
and we adjust the evaluations to provide the most accurate view of vendor offerings and strategies.
We set default weightings to reflect our analysis of the needs of large user companies and/or
other scenarios as outlined in the Forrester Wave evaluation and then score the vendors based
on a clearly defined scale. We intend these default weightings to serve only as a starting point and
encourage readers to adapt the weightings to fit their individual needs through the Excel-based tool.
The final scores generate the graphical depiction of the market based on current offering, strategy, and
market presence. Forrester intends to update vendor evaluations regularly as product capabilities and
vendor strategies evolve. For more information on the methodology that every Forrester Wave follows,
go to http://www.forrester.com/marketing/policies/forrester-wave-methodology.html.
Integrity Policy
We conduct all our research, including Forrester Wave evaluations, in accordance with our Integrity
Policy. For more information, go to http://www.forrester.com/marketing/policies/integrity-policy.html.
Endnotes
1
Cybersecurity is now part of regular executive discussions and is being allocated budgets accordingly. Chief
information security officers (CISOs) and their teams must exhibit business acumen in spending these budgets and
demonstrate how theyre reaching an appropriate state of cybersecurity readiness. For more, see the Cybersecurity
Budgets Remain Strong, Skills Lag In 2016 Forrester report.
To see more about AMA alerts, see the Planning For Failure Forrester report.
13
We work with business and technology leaders to develop

customer-obsessed strategies that drive growth.
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Core research and tools

Data and analytics
Peer collaboration
Analyst engagement
Consulting
Events
Forresters research and insights are tailored to your role and

critical business initiatives.
ROLES WE SERVE
Marketing & Strategy
Professionals
CMO
B2B Marketing
B2C Marketing
Customer Experience
Customer Insights
eBusiness & Channel
Strategy
Technology Management
Professionals
CIO
Application Development
& Delivery
Enterprise Architecture
Infrastructure & Operations
Security & Risk
Sourcing & Vendor
Management
Technology Industry
Professionals
Analyst Relations
CLIENT SUPPORT
For information on hard-copy or electronic reprints, please contact Client Support at
+1 866-367-7378, +1 617-613-5730, or clientsupport@forrester.com. We offer quantity
discounts and special pricing for academic and nonprofit institutions.
Forrester Research (Nasdaq: FORR) is one of the most influential research and advisory firms in the world. We work with
business and technology leaders to develop customer-obsessed strategies that drive growth. Through proprietary
research, data, custom consulting, exclusive executive peer groups, and events, the Forrester experience is about a
singular and powerful purpose: to challenge the thinking of our clients to help them lead change in their organizations.
118231
For more information, visit forrester.com.

Analyst Reports Forrester 2016 Automated Malware Analysis Wave

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analyst Reports Forrester 2016 Automated Malware Analysis Wave

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analyst Reports Forrester 2016 Automated Malware Analysis Wave

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware

Why Read This Report

In our 36-criteria evaluation of automated

Portfolio Vendors Lead While Two Startups

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

Notes & Resources

Related Research Documents

The Forrester Wave: SaaS Web Content

Forrester Research, Inc., 60 Acorn Park Drive, Cambridge, MA 02140 USA

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

Automated Malware Analysis Is A Necessity In Your Security Stack

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

Automated Malware Analysis Evaluation Overview

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FIGURE 1 Evaluated Vendors: Vendor Information And Selection Criteria

Palo Alto Networks

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FIGURE 2 Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 16

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

Palo Alto Networks

FIGURE 2 Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 16 (Cont.)

All scores are based on a scale of 0 (weak) to 5 (strong).

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016

Engage With An Analyst

Ask a question related to our research; a

Put research into practice with in-depth

Learn more about inquiry, including tips for

Learn about interactive advisory sessions

FOR SECURITY & RISK PROFESSIONALS

April 21, 2016

The Forrester Wave: Automated Malware Analysis, Q2 2016