For Akamai's Web Application Protector, should we prioritize more stringent security rules or focus on minimizing false positives to improve user experience?

Introduction

For Akamai's Web Application Protector, we're facing a critical trade-off between implementing more stringent security rules and minimizing false positives to improve user experience. This decision impacts the core functionality of our product and has significant implications for our customers' security posture and operational efficiency.

In my analysis, I'll explore the key factors influencing this trade-off, propose a structured approach to evaluate our options, and provide a data-driven recommendation for moving forward.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: I'm thinking about the current threat landscape and our customers' security needs. Could you provide more details on the types of attacks our Web Application Protector is primarily designed to prevent?

Why it matters: Helps prioritize security rules based on most common or severe threats Expected answer: Focus on SQL injection, XSS, and DDoS attacks Impact on approach: Would influence the balance between stringency and false positives for different attack types

• Business Context: Based on our market position, I assume we're targeting enterprise customers with complex web applications. Is this correct, and how does it align with our revenue model?

Why it matters: Informs the relative importance of security vs. user experience for our target market Expected answer: Primarily enterprise customers, subscription-based model Impact on approach: May lean towards stricter security if enterprise customers prioritize it

• User Impact: I'm considering the different user personas interacting with our product. Can you clarify who our primary users are – security teams, developers, or both?

Why it matters: Different user groups may have varying tolerances for false positives Expected answer: Both security teams and developers use the product Impact on approach: Would need to balance needs of both groups in our solution

• Technical: Regarding our current false positive rate, do we have data on its current level and how it compares to industry standards?

Why it matters: Establishes a baseline for improvement and competitive positioning Expected answer: Current false positive rate is X%, slightly above industry average Impact on approach: Would help set realistic goals for improvement without compromising security

• Resource: Considering the potential impact on our support team, what's our current capacity to handle increased inquiries if we implement stricter rules?

Why it matters: Ensures we can support the chosen solution operationally Expected answer: Support team is at 80% capacity, some room for increase Impact on approach: May influence the pace of implementing changes or require additional resources