Valuable data including personnel records, pending sales, product designs, and backup files are the lifeblood companies, which is why file activity monitoring and data leakage protection is a critical piece of the overall IT puzzle. Unfortunately, it’s also a piece which is often left missing when businesses fail to see what’s happening right under their noses and actively ignore the growing risk of insider threats.
File protection requires looking behind the perimeter
Tools focused on perimeter defense simply aren’t effective at defending against insider threats. It’s not enough to block unauthorized access to your clients’ systems – you also need to prevent the problems caused by authorized users doing things they shouldn’t. Setting and updating user and group permissions on files and folders, both on desktop workstations and servers is necessary for basic security within the network, but those permissions alone fail to provide any protection when an authorized user can use their valid read permissions to copy data to a USB thumb drive or Google Doc. They’re also powerless to prevent a user from emailing an Excel file to an outside (and unauthorized) party containing sensitive or privileged information.
Permissions can’t protect you from data leakage
Furthermore, permissions can only be applied to existing files and folders. Even if you’ve set up those permissions to be inherited by new files and sub-folders, that inheritance only applies to new files and sub-folders created inside those already existing folders. Therefore, files created by exporting sensitive data from a business application like your ERP or CRM systems would be unprotected since the user can choose that file to be exported into a folder without strict permissions. Consider an example of a sales manager exporting a spreadsheet from your ERP containing a list of customer accounts and credit card details into their “Documents” folder, or a shared drive on the network which is world-readable for convenience.
In either case, you wouldn’t even know that file existed unless you were looking for it and knew how to identify it as a file containing sensitive information. If you don’t know that file exists, there’s no way for you to protect it or monitor who views or modifies it.
You also would never know if that file was emailed to someone outside the company, transferred over an insecure protocol like FTP, saved to a company or personal laptop which was then stolen, or copied onto an external hard drive or USB stick which an employee then took home. In order to track and control sensitive and privileged company secrets, you need to monitor and control the files which contain those secrets, and this must be done over the entire lifetime of the file from the moment of its creation all the way through every edit, view, copy and rename. Only then can you meet the challenge of data leakage from inside threats like user mistakes and industrial espionage.
Only robust file protection can stop data leakage from the inside
This file-centric approach to data protection is at the heart of Actifile. By automatically classifying and tagging all files the moment they are created – whether exported from business applications or created within protected folders – they can be tracked over their entire lifetime. Since the tracking works by attaching code to the file itself, any time someone tries to email that file as an attachment, print it, copy it to a portable drive, or upload it to an outside server, that activity is immediately detected and stopped, with the appropriate people notified immediately.
Since this classifying, tagging and monitoring of files containing sensitive information is automatic and requires little human input, managed service providers can monitor the file activity of all their customers all at once, with a dashboard providing a “single pane of glass” into your entire customer base.
Where are the opportunities for data leakage in your customer’s networks? Our free risk analysis survey tool can show you where the holes are and how our file protection solution can safeguard your customers’ sensitive data. Data leakage from the inside is embarrassing and damaging to you client’s brand, opening the door to regulatory fines and lost customer trust.
Excellent article in Wired this week
In discussing deliverables from BI solutions, the article discusses the requirement in BI deliverables to allow people to then interpret the results with not factual (read best out-of-box thinking) but interpretive approaches
“However accurate the data, however good the visualizations, however well laid out, the dashboard will be incomplete. Yes, benchmarks can provide a very useful high-level synopsis. But you should also provide your decision makers with tools that enable them to explore the data themselves. If they can try out the effect of alternative selections they will feel much more confident in the data itself. If the tool enables them to pick up good “information scent,” suggesting new trails of reasoning to follow, they will lead themselves to useful insights.”
Follow the link at “http://www.wired.com/insights/2013/06/touch-the-next-frontier-of-business-intelligence/”
In an age of Hadoop and a general analytics revolution, it’s easy to poke fun at legacy data warehouse vendors such as Teradata. Some people might even call it fun. After all, they sell expensive appliances and weren’t built from the ground up to handle the unstructured data that most people think of when they think of “big data.”
But whatever you think about Teradata’s approach to handling big data workloads, make no mistake about the company’s clout: It has been around for decades, and it’s still analyzing boatloads of data for some of the biggest names in business. I spent a day in February touring the Teradata Labs facility in San Diego, and although I heard all about the technology and the company’s vision for a Teradata-Hadoop-Aster analytics super-environment, the thing that stuck out most were the users. Walmart, eBay, Continental … Apple.
Here’s how they’re all using Teradata and at what scale (try not to faint when you think of the bill):
- Apple: Apple is operating a multiple-petabyte Teradata system (that became apparent during its iCloud launch in 2011) and, I learned, was Teradata’s “fastest ever customer to a petabyte.” Apple uses the data warehouse to get a better understanding of its customers across product groups. Now every piece of identifiable information — and those iTunes interactiona generate a lot of data — goes into the system so the company knows who’s who and what they’re up to.
Rows of Teradata appliances.
- Walmart: The retail giant deployed Teradata’s first-ever terabyte-scale database in 1992, and it has grown, uh, a bit since then. Its operational system was at 2.5 petabytes as of 2008, and is certainly leaps and bounds bigger by now — likely well into the double digits when you consider it operates separate ones for Walmart and Sam’s Club as well as a backup system. The analytics efforts have essentially helped Walmart become a massive consignment shop. It tells suppliers, “You have three feet of shelf space. Optimize it.” And then it gives them any data they could possibly need to determine what’s selling, how fast and even whether they should redesign their packaging to fit more on the shelves.
- eBay: eBay (e ebay) has two systems in place, and they’re both big. Its primary data warehouse is 9.2 petabyes; its “singularity system” that stores web clicks and other “big” data is more than 40 petabytes. It has a single table that’s 1 trillion rows. Yes, this is smaller than the 50 petabytes worth of Hadoop capacity eBay added last year, but Teradata is quick to point out that all of its systems support data into and out of Hadoop, so it’s not as if eBay is operating two entirely distinct data environments.
Of course, Teradata has lots of other petabyte-scale customers, with Verizon, AT&T and Bank of America among them. Here are a few more interesting use cases:
- Harrah’s (now part of the Caesar’s Entertainment casino empire) understands how much money particular gamblers can afford to lose in a day before they won’t come back the next day.
- Disney is rolling out new bracelet tickets equipped with GPS and NFC that track everything visitors do while inside Disney’s amusement parks. The New York Times detailed the privacy implications of this move in a January article.
- A manufacturing customer generates 20 terabytes of data per hour while testing products, although that volume is ultimately reduced to about 1 terabyte after the valuable data is filtered out.
- At some point, Continental Airlines decided it wanted to keep its customers happy and began assessing them by lifetime value (which, it turns out, is often inversely related to frequent-flyer status) and began making alternative arrangements for them as soon as the airline realized flights would be delayed.
- A luxury car company used Aster Data to analyze the pattern of failures for various components inside its cars. It found out that lighting, seats and infotainment often failed together (they’re on the same circuit) and began inspecting all three when a customer comes in for service on any of them.
None of this means Teradata is destined to continue being a huge name in analytics (Scott Yara, co-founder of rival EMC Greenplum, recently called data warehouses this generation’s mainframe), but it’s still interesting to learn how big companies are analyzing their data, regardless what they’re running on. And with exabytes worth of data no doubt residing in customer systems across the world, Teradata isn’t going anywhere soon
intelligence business; business. Intelligence; business intelligence consultancy; business intelligence software; business intelligence solutions; software business intelligence; business intelligence tools; business intelligence solution; business intelligence services, business intelligence companies; business intelligence system; business intelligence tool; Continue reading
Distributed knowledge pool to the frontlines.
The most successful business especially from a customer perspective are those that make information available to all personnel (within reason – eg HR information) because any one person can respond to a customer situation – and more importantly resolve it. Continental Airlines when it restructured after the second bankruptcy under Gordon Bethune (From Worst to First) was so heavily controlled with rules and regulations, neither customers nor employees could get answers. Hidden information breeds suspicion and distrust. One of Bethunes’s early moves after the restructuring was to hold a big bonfire and burn all the rules books – then told the front line employees to do what is right to resolve customer challenges – the empowerment made for better employee relations and was the first major airline to actually go out of its way to inform customers of what was happening improving customer relations significantly. The availability of information AND the empowerment of employees made continental one of the best to fly. Continue reading
Distributed knowledge pool to the frontlines
The most successful business especially from a customer perspective are those that make information available to all personnel (within reason – eg HR information) because any one person can respond to a customer situation – and more importantly resolve it. Continental Airlines when it restructured after the second bankruptcy under Gordon Bethune (From Worst to First) was so heavily controlled with rules and regulations, neither customers nor employees could get answers. Hidden information breeds suspicion and distrust. One of Bethunes’s early moves after the restructuring was to hold a big bonfire and burn all the rules books – then told the front line employees to do what is right to resolve customer challenges – the empowerment made for better employee relations and was the first major airline to actually go out of its way to inform customers of what was happening improving customer relations significantly. The availability of information AND the empowerment of employees made continental one of the best to fly.
It is very difficult to place a value on the benefits received. How well are we using the information to make better decisions? There are metrics, such as comparisons of operational efficiencies, before and after, that are relatively standard for some of the most simple of BI applications. Projecting and calculating tangible values for returns, especially on more complex BI investments, is not simple. The process can be frustrating and has often seemed impossible and, perhaps, pointless. But if we can assess these benefits and provide some tangible ratings, we can provide a basis for management decision-making about BI investments for the organization.
Think about it this way:
Good BI is the fusion of the right information, the right time, the right format, and the right human and/or system resources. If we wish to improve BI, we ask these questions:
- Do the people (or intelligent systems) have the information needed, when they need it, to make decisions?
- Do those people have the expertise, training and mindset to use that information in the best way for the good of the organization?
- Are they doing their job better because of the information being delivered?
- How much difference does that information make to them?
A Benefits Audit for BI
The most effective way to assess the benefits of BI is to ask the people who are involved. We can use questionnaires and surveys administered at regular intervals. We need them however, to make a realistic assessment of the dollar benefit of doing business differently. A benefits audit must also be structured to give tangible, realistic assessments of the relative benefits of BI projects, BI day-to-day use, and the total organizational BI investment.
Using well-constructed metrics and patterns, we can turn the opinions of experts into a trustworthy assessment of the benefits of BI for the organization. Those experts are the people who use the information and the managers who daily assess the value of the performance of those people who use this information. We may also wish to add competitive analysis and opinions from customers, marketing teams and consultants. Thus, we can turn expert evaluations into a practical, meaningful assessment tool for management.
There are a number of valuable features to be gained from such a benefits audit. We can:
- Make better decisions regarding commitment of resources to BI. The relative values of BI projects can be identified before spending the money on development. Opportunity costs and risks can be evaluated up front.
- Improve management planning both strategic and tactical. Competitive, legal and regulatory requirements can more easily be assessed and planned for, and associated risks can be reduced.
- Encourage better decision-making.
- Improve the quality of BI and BI projects through a better understanding of the results. We will be able to feed results back into the processes for BI design, development and use.
- The organization’s culture can evolve and improve through an increased awareness of BI, integration and communication.
- Provide encouragement and support for our people. Just administering such audits will send a message that the organization cares about them, respects their opinions and is open to new ideas.
- Encourage creativity and broader use of BI through recognition and associated education, training and awareness.
The questions, formats and process of the BI benefits audit will provide increased awareness, understanding and training for those who develop and implement the audit, as well as for those who participate.
© Trevelyan Group LLC 2012
Humans inherently ask the wrong questions
People in business today are trapped within their own frame of reference. The result of poor hiring practices? More likely the challenges that companies put in front of employees but without giving them the capability to search for answers to complex problems – with nuance and experience major contributors to the answers set. Nuance is as much of the corporate knowledge base as is hard financial numbers. The unknown is similarly a corporate asset. But even the best companies today provide lots of data but limited ability to determine meaning.
Business (also schools) has trained people to stay within a sphere of reference – some (not all) in-house data and limited external information. The approaches to Business Intelligence applications haven’t helped as they are often limited to relating “like” information – like financial data. The result is that business has contributed to the perspective that humans don’t ask the right question because we have never given them the opportunity, training and empowerment to succeed.
Usually pushed off as too expensive to acquire or too complex to bring together, we have worked hard to justify the limited information available to people making corporate decisions. We have provided ‘answers’ when supporting additional questioning is required. The limited foresight that exists related to corporate information use. If Sam Walton had not had the foresight that information on all transactions going through cash registers, deep knowledge of customers and local market bias, and the power of sharing thee resultant knowledge with suppliers, he would have built just another big-box retail outlet. However Walton, armed with a far reaching vision of the power of knowledge, created a new retail concept. He enabled his buyers to ask span-crossing questions and supported the answer determination with some of the largest databases in the world. Each buyer has access to petabytes of transactional information to base decisions.
Corporate decisioning has also contributed to the myth that people ask the wrong questions. Decisions have often been made on direction and approach. When employees, armed with knowledge see answers that don’t fit the mold, management is loathe to listen. People begin to fear the answer. If it is not the expected or wanted answer, retribution is often the result. People are boxed into a world that even if they have the knowledge base, and the capability of questioning to get ‘answers’ the answers are not ‘right’.
I have always asked companies to value their customers from most to least profitable. The ranking then begs the obvious question – why don’t we fire the non-profitable customers. The answer should be to fire them and put the resources (product development, marketing etc) to bear on the profitable customers. Too often the answer is unpalatable to (especially middle management) management because it forces the realization that business as usual is not as good as it could be if hard decisions are made. Great examples are the US airline industry and US Banking. In major banks, profitable customers generally are less than 20% of the base and yet the banks continue to promote expansion of that base – acquiring four non-profitable customers for every profitable one and often a high cost. The airlines try to be everything to everybody. With the exception of focused air carriers (Southwest, AirTran), most airlines would probably be better off firing all unprofitable customers – but when management looks at the situation, they realize that their company might be highly profitable if they act, but the business model will be different – instead of a $10 Billion revenue airline, it might be only $1Billion – but highly profitable. “Business as usual” is always the decision maker.
Facts versus trends. It is easier to state that ‘we sold 100 widgets this month’ vs. looking a trend that says “worldwide widget sales are down and we should evaluate whether we should continue with this product”
Why don’t we ask the right questions???
Technology is transforming innovation at its core, allowing companies to enable new ideas at speeds and costs that were unforeseeable a few short years ago. They can see results from promotions, process change and productivity improvements quickly. Initiatives that used to take months and huge expense to coordinate and launch can be performed at low cost. Innovation becomes more efficient and cheaper.
Innovation in the enablement of knowledge creation and use will bring big changes for corporate culture—making it easier to challenge business as usual, and force managers to give more personnel throughout the company the capability, encouragement and reward for asking the hard questions that give answers that enable profitability and transformation. The provision of the real corporate knowledge base and the tools to use it will eliminate the perception that people ask inherently ask the wrong question.
©Trevelyan Group LLC 2012
Information democracy. Broader corporate asset with broader access
Who can afford not to know what is outdated, ineffective or threatened in their business model or market??
Current economic crisis has made effective BI adoption a critical imperative – who knows what aspects of their markets, business model operating practices are no longer viable. At the same time, information overload is a reality.
We are not even tackling the biggest challenges yet. We are not capturing and mining voice communication. We have limited mining of email data. Competition in an information-intensive world demands we fix the problem. Exponential explosion in information, evolution and acceleration of information types and economic crisis has permanently changed markets/business models, information is increasingly the value-add differentiator in products & services
We are seeing organizations and their people wrestling with the information problem. IT organizations have been doing a reasonable job of facilitating access to structured data – rows of numerical data and parsed textual data, organized in databases, spreadsheets and reports. However, information required for decisioning often relies on subtleties of meaning contained in unstructured data – text files, memos, emails, pdfs, blogs, voice and video. Add to that are evolving voice-to-text capabilities to ‘mine’ conversations with contact centers.
To many suppliers – and their customers – it makes a lot of sense to bring these two worlds of data together under one, unified information management architecture. It means that a call centre operator, for example, can see in one screen a customer’s sales history, perhaps his profitability to the company – and his tendency to complain about service to the ombudsman. It means that a series of revealing emails between customers and staff can help to explain a sales manager’s poor figures.
Both types of information contained in files are packed full of meaning and informal structures – but virtually none have been available to business decision-makers at any level of organizations. IT bases its BI information as facts and figures because that is what they have always worked with and delivered as reports and evolving knowledge bases. What about text? How does IT deal with it? It is a fundamentally different and challenging environment without the foundation of traditional corporate lore. There are great tools in the market for gaining understanding form text and verbal communications but are not generally considered in the mainstream of business applications.
The evolving social media phenomena places even more challenges to corporations and their IT ‘knowledge” enablers. Whereas the human can quickly ascertain substance and nuance form the interplay of multiple media types and characteristics, corporations have struggled to deliver even fundamental knowledge creation capabilities – the foundation for BI – for decision-makers
The core problem in business is that the business continues to run with inadequate tools and approaches – like it has for the last 50 years, but the world is changing rapidly around us. Information amounts, availability, acceleration of information types are all challenges to individuals trying to make intelligent decisions.
We see that despite the availability of almost any type of information for knowledge creation, BI has been generally the tool select groups in companies. Pervasive BI, enabling decision-making personnel throughout companies is the fundamental basis of competition in the future. The failure of BI tool makers, corporation IT departments and executive management to recognize that knowledge’ and it’s use to transform business processes’ relies on ready access to the information asset. We can no longer allow front line personnel, middle management and product development personnel to be basing decisions based on BI almost as a shadow – using Excel spreadsheets and the like to support their decision making. Especially since shadow BI has significant challenges – info is not shared, not current nor vetted by business process owners (eg the CFO).
A holistic perspective to managing strategic, operational and analytical BI is required. While technical issues are extensive, management must come face to face with cultural, operational and business aspects as well. Organizations need to embrace the cultural challenges preventing knowledge creation and employee success.
We need to move beyond the complexity. We need management vision to support the cultural challenges facing all companies in this competitive environment.
- Having the vision to enable corporate IT enablers to provide tools, access and capabilities to unlock the asset
- Sharing of corporate and cross-departmental information
- Information as a corporate asset is not recognized
- Eliminating lack of trust
- recognizing that users view information as a “fact in time” that then drives new questions – usually in multiple layers of detail and / or broadening to include other information that is or is not related in the traditional (read IT sense)
- Removing secrecy
- Eliminating fear of decision making by giving workers at all levels knowledge
- lack of foresight
- IT budgets squandered on fads, applications or crisis of the moment
We need to embrace the new competitive reality and resolve it with access, use, and delivery of the knowledge inherent in the entire information asset of the corporation – and enable its decision makers
©Trevelyan Group LLC 2012