Akamai-Apple Master Services Agreement

...

Fourth, section 1.5, the Apple content that is stored on the Akamai Network web server will not be segregated or in a separate physical location from the web servers on which Akamai’s other customer’s content is being stored on. Therefore, Apple’s competitors content could be stored in the same physical location as Apple content.

Fifth, under section 7.3 Apple’s commitment, if Apple as of July 31, 2000, has not paid Akamai fees equal to at least $12.360 million, then Apple will have to pay Akamai the difference between $12.360 million and the fee amount actually paid by Apple. Furthermore, should Apple elect to discontinue the QT-TV service at any time during the Exclusivity Period for any reason, Apple will have to agree to use a modified minimum amount of Akamai Free Flow Services. Therefore, Apple will be obligated to purchase a monthly minimum of Free Flow Services equal to 50% of the average cost.

Although the contract provides many benefits for Apple to stream their content on QT-TV, Apple needs to be firmly aware that Akamai will also be supporting and providing services to any or all competitors of Apple. This includes QuickTime and QT-TV, and Akamai will also support these third parties in the distribution of streaming media that are in QuickTime formats. Therefore, if Apple was looking to provide a better online streaming performance than their competitors, while their competitors are also using the same Akamai Network servers, then Apple needs to seriously rethink about using this network service. Since both Apple and their competitors could be using the same Akamai Network, then the same streaming performance will be the same, and there will be no distinct advantage between Apple and its competitors.

Akamai has stated in their contact that they will have in place and in operation at all times network security as specified in their Network Security Protocols listed in the contract. These protocols will monitor and protect against unauthorized access to Apple content. In addition, Akamai will notify Apple immediately in the event of any breach of network security that would affect Apple content.

However, one stipulation that Apple needs to be aware of when using Akamai’s Network Security Protocols is that the portion of the Akamai Network through which Apple content will pass through and the web servers on which Apple content will be stored on will not be isolated. The content will not be stored in a separate physical location from the web servers that the other Akamai’s customers’ use. This means that the other Akamai’s customers’ content, which could be Akamai or Apple’s competitors, will also be transmitted and stored on the same web server as Apples.

Apple needs to address their concern with having network segmentation. Apple content both transmitted and stored needs to be either on a separate physical location or segmented from web servers that are also used by Akamai’s other customers. Having Apple content transmitted and stored on the same web servers as other Akamai’s customers presents a high risk level in that if an intruder manages to gain access to that web server then all content being transmitted and stored on it can be stolen. For example, in the event that there is a data breach where an intruder is targeting one of Akamai’s other customers. The intruder could potentially steal not only its targeted victim’s data but also Apple content along with it. As a result, having the network segmented, using the same example, if a web server become compromised in one segment, then it doesn’t automatically give an attacker access to the other web server on another segment. Having network segmentation in place will greatly limit the threat exposure.

In summary, in order for Apple to move forward with this contract, Apple will need to consider the information security implications of having Apple content both transmitted and stored in the same physical location with other Akamai’s customers. If Apple chooses to move forward, then Apple needs to address the security threats, vulnerabilities, and risks associated with this decision. For example, an intruder manages to gain access to Akamai Network’s web server, where he/she is able to intercept and steal all the content being transmitted or stored on it. The intruder might be interested in Akamai content, but because Apple content is in the same physical location, the intruder might unintentionally steal Apple content which may contain sensitive information on their customers and users. Another example, is the risk of a Denial of Service (DoS) Attack on the Akamai Networks’ web server. The attacker has a specific target, Apple’s competitor, who happens to share the same physical location of web servers as Apple. Although Apple was not the direct target, Apple was still caught in the attack. Now the web servers are down and the customers and user are unable to access QT-TV.

Therefore, a recommendation that was mentioned earlier was to either have the Apple content stored at a separate physical location or having the network segmented for their content. Having the network segmented for their content will ensure that if one web server is compromised, then it doesn’t automatically give an attacker access to the other web server. Also, if the security control is implemented differently on each segment, then it will make it harder for an attacker to attack the other segments because it would require more time to figure out what kind of security control was put in place. As a result, having the Apple content on a separate network segment can greatly reduce the threat exposure. If this option can be implemented in the contract, then Apple can feel more secured about the confidentiality, availability, and integrity of their content.

References

Strategic Alliance and Master Services Agreement - Akamai Technologies Inc. and Apple Computer Inc. - FindLaw. (n.d.). Retrieved March 03, 2016, from http://corporate.findlaw.com/contracts/operations/strategic-alliance-and-master-services-agreement-akamai.html

...