[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View]
Tuesday, May 31st, 2016
| Time | Event |
| 4:36p | Why Colocation Data Centers Can’t Scale Biometrics Effectively Josh Solomon is Manager of the Data Center Division at BioConnect. Colocation data centers are hands down the largest consumers of commercial biometric technologies for access control. So how come every colocation provider I speak to is unhappy with the way biometric solutions scale inside their data centers? The reason is biometric systems are inherently hardware focused and almost always offer no ability to scale, integrate or support at enterprise scale. For colocation providers, security is not a “keeping the lights on” activity but rather a driving factor in the day-to-day success of business. Biometric solutions are actually a key selling feature of their data centers. Unfortunately, the biometric systems previously deployed are not meeting the evolving demands placed on colocation data centers by their customers or their security teams. As we evaluate what is truly required to deploy, maintain and scale an enterprise biometric solution in a colocation data center there are three core challenges in the way of a better biometric solution. Lack of Standardized DeploymentsThis is the biggest issue colocation providers face with biometrics. Each facility they operate has deployed biometrics, but each has done so differently. Whether that means different technologies (finger vs hand), or standalone systems at each data center, the one thing that is clear is there is no standard way to deploy biometrics. This creates a ton of headaches for data center managers and security teams because it significantly reduces their ability to operate effectively. More concerning is the negative impact it creates on the customer experience. Imagine this scenario. A customer leases space in five data centers. At each location anyone requiring access is forced to stop, check in with security, and enroll his or her biometric. The customer experience slows down and the enterprise has to manage multiple identities. The fast-paced environment of colocation does not allow for this type of friction. The issue is that each data center runs completely standalone opposed to as part of an ecosystem of locations. This also creates a large amount of deployment risk. We often see sporadic/inconsistent programming from facility to facility that negatively effects the way the systems perform. Lack of Integration to Access ControlLets take a second to think about who truly interacts with the biometric system the most inside the data center. Is it the engineers? No. Is it the IT staff? How about the security system design team? Wrong. It’s the security guards. Security guards are tasked with managing the day-to-day operations of these systems and usually the inclusion of a biometrics means… more work. With high turnover and lower technical skills, the security guards can be challenged to operate the biometric system correctly. The data center’s access control system is managed correctly while the biometric system is neglected creating bad data, security risks and the perception that biometrics don’t work. The challenge is that access control providers do not have the resources to build and maintain biometric integrations. Their businesses are too large and biometric revenue does not yet represent a compelling reason to lead these efforts. Don’t get me wrong, there are some access control systems that built their own biometric integrations. However most were completed in the early 2000s and have not been updated since. While these integrations provide a stronger experience, they struggle to allow the colocation provider to scale their biometric use as they are rarely updated due to competing development priorities. Lack of Enterprise SupportThe biometric industry has been extremely hardware orientated since its birth. This is because most vendors entered the space seeking to build solutions that met federal requirements. As the need for biometric solutions continues to shift towards consumer and enterprise markets these solutions begin to feel like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The challenge with this is that the biometric vendor usually has a “device only” point of view. The results? The inability to support deployments that span multiple locations and regions, require high availability and are completed by multiple systems integrators. How Do We Move Forward?The colocation market is not going to slow down. The need for colocation becomes critical as cloud computing, IOT, VR and machine learning create a immense amount of data. As the enterprise continues down this path, privacy and more complex compliance/regulation requirements (PCI, HIPAA, SOC, etc.) are a major concern that will only drive biometric growth. So if you believe the above to be true, how do we make biometric systems a better fit inside our digital factories? As a colocation provider I would be actively look for software-focused solutions. The ability to operate an enterprise scale biometric system will often provide strong integration to access control and better visibility to support your data centers. The difference between leveraging a solutions provider versus a hardware provider will not only allow you to overcome these core challenges but also increase the long term success with identity solutions. Industry Perspectives is a content channel at Data Center Knowledge highlighting thought leadership in the data center arena. See our guidelines and submission process for information on participating. View previously published Industry Perspectives in our Knowledge Library. |
| 4:47p | Microsoft Ventures to Bring Early-Stage Startups into Its Cloud Ecosystem
Brought to You by Talkin’ Cloud While Microsoft Azure is often synonymous with enterprise cloud, the Redmond giant still has some work to do on attracting startups to use its cloud services. To address this, Microsoft has created a new team focused on investing in early stage companies developing products and services around cloud computing, called Microsoft Ventures. If the name sounds familiar it’s because it’s the same name the company used three years ago for its startup accelerator program, which has now been rebranded to Microsoft Accelerator. Interestingly, Microsoft recently said that more than 40 percent of Azure revenue is from startups and ISVs. While Microsoft already has a couple of initiatives around investing in startups, Kashyap said Microsoft Ventures will exist somewhere in between. Microsoft Accelerator helps early stage companies with tools, technology and consulting, and other the other end of the spectrum is larger investments and acquisitions. The team will start with a presence in the San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, New York City, and Tel Aviv with plans to expand to other geographies in the coming years. “When I came to Microsoft earlier this year, I was driven by the opportunity to establish a corporate venture group that would create an additional channel to engage the start-up ecosystem. It would support not just company objectives, but our customers, partners and the ecosystem more broadly,” Kashyap said. “In Microsoft’s history of engaging with and supporting start-ups, we’ve done a lot of investing, but not a lot of early stage. Because we would often invest alongside commercial deals, we were not a part of the early industry conversations on disruptive technology trends. With a formalized venture fund, Microsoft now has a seat at the table.” This first ran at http://talkincloud.com/cloud-computing-f |
| 5:53p | HPE Bets on Core Data Center Hardware Sales to Drive Profits Once it’s done shedding its Enterprise Services business, Hewlett-Packard Enterprise is betting on its bread-and-butter data center hardware business – servers, storage, networking, and software to manage all of the above – to continue driving the bulk of its revenue. The company, which only recently separated from the former Hewlett-Packard’s printer and PC business, announced earlier this month that Enterprise Services would spin off and merge with Computer Sciences Corp. In an analysis of recent revenue and profit trends of HPE’s various businesses, The Next Platform’s Timothy Prickett Morgan points out that enterprise technology services are a people-intensive, low-margin business, and says that this is probably the biggest reason CEO Meg Whitman has decided to get out of it. While its bread-and-butter server business has been essentially flat, it’s generated a lot more profit for HPE than Enterprise Services. Second to servers in terms of revenue is Infrastructure Technology Outsourcing, which is being shed as part of the Enterprise Services unit. The only clear way for the company to drive meaningful revenue growth now appears to be simply selling higher volumes of commoditized data center hardware, Prickett Morgan concludes. Driving volume in hardware sales is HPE’s first line of defense against the market behemoth that is about to be born as Dell closes its $67 billion acquisition of EMC. Read more at The Next Platform. |
| 5:59p | IT Innovators: Rethinking Assumptions About the Cloud
Brought to You by IT Pro Today’s corporate environments are filled with leaps and often times hesitations, followed by even larger leaps toward cloud deployment. But about those hesitations: from fears about IT jobs being outsourced to security concerns and questions about the most effective ways to centrally manage a cloud solution, apprehensions can run far and wide. IT Innovators recently caught up with John Webster, analyst at Evaluator Group, to chat about some of the most common assumptions about the cloud and what factors should instead be top of mind for a more effective cloud deployment. What would you say is the most common assumption about the cloud? What’s driving this, and what do you believe is the truth behind the concern? I think one topic that really needs to be examined in more detail is the issue of security in the cloud, particularly the public cloud. There are a couple things going on that are changing people’s perceptions about security in the cloud. First, the more you understand the cloud, how to use it and which provider you want to work with, the less security becomes an issue. The best thing you can do for security as an issue is to get more experience working with the cloud. More experienced users have a tendency to view security as less of an issue. They realize that things like finding people to actually administer a cloud IT environment is the number 1 priority. Security seems to fall down the list. What steps can IT professionals take to calm security concerns? The good cloud service providers have heard that security is an issue. They are more than aware of it, and they’ve taken measures to address the problem. Sometimes, enterprise IT users have acknowledged security in the cloud to actually be better than their own Internet security and have moved apps to the cloud because of that. Now, some people are more concerned about the communication links in between getting from their location to the cloud service provider and back as being a bigger security concern than the cloud provider itself. My advice is to talk to the cloud vendor to address those concerns. Are there any misconceptions about shadow IT, or the concept of employees using cloud applications that haven’t been authorized internally for use, and what are corporations doing to address this phenomenon? Enterprises have seen this cloud creep, if you will, or proliferation of cloud usage and have encountered issues with that. For example, the cost of all these clouds start to get out of control if they’re not managed. You’ve got contracts, commitments, but you start to sense that every department now gets a cloud and questions arise, like: what kind of control are we exerting over this, and if we are not exerting any kind of control, should we manage this centrally? While the shift to the cloud began as a shadow IT phenomenon, meaning that employees were using unsanctioned cloud and mobile apps without corporations being fully aware, it’s now becoming a centralized IT-administered phenomenon because of cost and governance reasons. If we’re going to put sensitive data in the cloud, we need to know the nature of that data, the service provider and whether or not we even have the authority to put some kinds of data in the cloud without running the risk of exposure to regulatory agencies. As more companies shift toward taking a centralized position to cloud management, what kinds of things should be on their radar? People are starting to understand that they can use the cloud resources much more efficiently if they know from a centralized position what it is they need. This includes what kinds of contracts they will negotiate, what kind of pricing is available, and how to best manage pricing. Weighing these types of questions will allow IT professionals to make the most effective use of the cloud. Renee Morad is a freelance writer and editor based in New Jersey. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, Discovery News, Business Insider, Ozy.com, NPR, MainStreet.com, and other outlets. If you have a story you would like profiled, contact her at renee.morad@gmail.com. The IT Innovators series of articles is underwritten by Microsoft, and is editorially independent. This first ran at http://windowsitpro.com/it-innovators/it-i |
| << Previous Day |
2016/05/31 [Calendar] |
Next Day >> |