Commentary

Larry Greenemeier
 

Check Point Made The Right Move In Dropping Sourcefire Bid

The fastest way to obscurity in the security market is to worry about yesterday's problems. Check Point Software Technologies is looking to put its aborted bid to buy Sourcefire behind it. Once the deal came under the scrutiny of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, both companies would have been wrapped up in red tape for months. Unacceptable in the fast-moving world of IT security.

The fastest way to obscurity in the security market is to worry about yesterday's problems. Check Point Software Technologies is looking to put its aborted bid to buy Sourcefire behind it. Once the deal came under the scrutiny of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, both companies would have been wrapped up in red tape for months. Unacceptable in the fast-moving world of IT security."We are talking to Sourcefire about a number of security announcements," Ken Fitzpatrick, Check Point chief marketing officer, told me Thursday. "We jointly withdrew from CFIUS review so we could be more responsive to our customers. The CFIUS process was very complex in dealing with 12 agencies."

At the center of the controversy was Israel-based Check Point's intention to buy Maryland-based Sourcefire Inc., which employs the creator of the Snort open-source intrusion prevention and detection technology. The proposed $225 million deal was announced in October. Most of Check Point's 1,400 employees work outside Israel, with about 600 in the U.S. and more than 200 in Europe and Asia.


More Security Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

Fitzpatrick maintains that the resources devoted to responding to CFIUS's inquiries and the delay in its proposed Sourcefire acquisition would have hurt Check Point's efforts to expand its intrusion detection and prevention technologies. "You can't sit still in this market," he says. "The customers' demands are real, and we can't wait several months."

The two already have a history together: Sourcefire adheres to Check Point's Open Platform For Security, or Opsec, framework, ensuring that their applications can integrate. Looks like Check Point and Sourcefire will have to remain just friends for the time being, which is probably for the best in today's politically charged business environment.

Check Point has yet to address whether it expected CFIUS to intervene when the company first announced the plans to buy Sourcefire back in October. My question: Was this business as usual for CFIUS? Or did things get political, as they did when Dubai Ports World of United Arab Emirates attempted to take over the operation of terminals at six major U.S. ports? Stay tuned.


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links