121–130 of 255 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from How can they do that and save the client money at the same time?
They hire the IT staff. Not the management, HR, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I can't speak to the exact circumstances, IBM when it takes over operations often hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from and runs systems on multiple-year contracts. At any rate, I believe few would contest that IBM in general is a more reliable vendor than Tata, other Indian suppliers or say, offices in Poland. EDIT: Details on IBM and Australian census. http://www.abc.net.au/news/201…
India I can understand, but what is your deal with Poland? Historically Poland has excelled in stuff like mathematics and Polish programmers are very skilled. A Polish team even came in second in the ACM International Collegiate Programming Competition recently, so wtf dude?
Care to elaborate a bit?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I can't speak to the exact circumstances, IBM when it takes over operations often hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from and runs systems on multiple-year contracts. At any rate, I believe few would contest that IBM in general is a more reliable vendor than Tata, other Indian suppliers or say, offices in Poland. EDIT: Details on IBM and Australian census. http://www.abc.net.au/news/201…
> IBM when it takes over operations often hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from and runs systems on multiple-year contracts. I've seen this happen many times and it's always been successful. They can replicate the business processes they've honed over time whilst keeping that important business knowledge. It's also often better for the staff as they can hand off that knowledge and move inte…
Now they work for IBM, and all the things they did above-and-beyond their job description are now billable. Now their incentive isn't to help company X that they wanted to work for, but to screw company X for every nickel-and-dime because that's where their new employer's revenue comes from. And they know all the skeletons in the closet and all the pain points.
Stab good people in the back and you make powerful enemies, the managers of all the company X's out there never learn this lesson.
By using IT outsourcing in India (Tata?), Poland, BA and its parent is revealing some important information: They are cutting corners to the point of risking airline operations. The question is, where else are they unnecessarily cutting corners? Are they cutting unnecessary corners on airplane maintenance? Other quality airlines have outsourced IT or part of their IT operations, but they are careful about choosing th…
In the tech-related (but now fully mainstream, unlike a few years ago) news these days, there are a number of recurring themes. 1. Massive security breaches affecting major corporations, governments, and so on. 2. Massive IT outages, affecting corporations, governments and so forth. It doesn't take a lot of incidents to mark them as 'massive' since things are strongly centralized in this world. Meanwhile, in the last…
It seems that companies would rather buy "insurance" rather than spend money on actual security. They have accepted that they will eventually be hacked or have a really expensive outage, so now they want a cushion of money to pay for any penalties and lawsuits. I get the impression that for the most part, no one really believes in security, and doesn't understand that it's a process and not a product. They already tr…
So true. I used to wonder why corporates can't build a real security team. One would spend $1M on an annual contract but perhaps you will do okay for $700,000 for a few security engineers. Then I realized that most corps are indeed looking for insurances.
You see, managed security vendors have a team. You don't manage the hiring, the tooling building etc. Obviously you can't just sit back and watch them put out the fire. You train them to understand a bit about your environments, you work with them on triages and resolutions, and you work with them to integrate your systems with them (e.g install an agent etc)
But it isn't most enterprises' interest to build a strong security team. Many of the in-house security team's role is to manage incident response. Many of them don't really have a say, they are often consulted and that's it.
Many of the product demos sound exicting and if you are not careful during your POC you will end up with a medicore product. Even if you did your best during POC yo evaluate the product, you will realized the product is really medicore. It caught the low-hanging fruits and are full of false positive. You ask for better analysis but because they come in as black-box, there is a lot of back and forth before you can act on the issue. So at work I would get a ticket from the vendor and I would end up doing a lot of the analysis. That sucks because while I enjoy doing security triage, that's not my role, but the conflicting side is at least they caught something. I would have to engineer or deployment some solutions and monitor the whole thing, since no one man or team can do everyone's job.
Since no one wants to be responsible for other's job, that's the whole point of having a secuirty team. It just happens that team, the people who are building tools and monitoring incidents are outsourced.
Most importantly, there is very little control of what your vendor can do. Want a new feature? Want better reporting? Want to change some configuration? A lot of time you are out of luck, or you need to be patience.
But, seriously, security practice is not magical. There are best practices such as SSH to server using key or cert authentication, not password. Least privilege to run processes, so system admin/devops should create a checklist on what's in place what isn't. It does take a serious committment from management to move forward though.
And security is an iterative process. Evaluate the best most secure option possible for the moment being, and put a realistic plan together for the remaining unresolved concerns.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I can't speak to the exact circumstances, IBM when it takes over operations often hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from and runs systems on multiple-year contracts. At any rate, I believe few would contest that IBM in general is a more reliable vendor than Tata, other Indian suppliers or say, offices in Poland. EDIT: Details on IBM and Australian census. http://www.abc.net.au/news/201…
> hires the IT staff of the firm it is taking over operations from How can they do that and save the client money at the same time?
Because the staff they transferred over are used to train cheaper replacements then laid off after 2 years. That is the plan all along, tho' the staff will never be told it upfront.
I'm leaving my citi card for a chase one due to poor infrastructure but I could have avoided a lot of wasted time if I hadn't opened it in the first place.
Airlines should band together and form working group to redevelop the old system in modern open source tech. Yes it would probably take 5+ years to develop and roll out, but they can't keep maintaining these 50 year old mainframes that cost them tens of millions a year in downtime.
I'd rather fly on an airline that hasn't 'upgraded' core systems.
By using IT outsourcing in India (Tata?), Poland, BA and its parent is revealing some important information: They are cutting corners to the point of risking airline operations. The question is, where else are they unnecessarily cutting corners? Are they cutting unnecessary corners on airplane maintenance? Other quality airlines have outsourced IT or part of their IT operations, but they are careful about choosing th…
I'm not so sure about that. Here are 4 of the 5 big carriers in the U.S and they have all had national outages within the last year due to "IT."
Delta:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/30/delta-outage-...
SouthWest:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/southwest-airlines-computer-outa...
United:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-united-flight-dela...
Jet Blue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are very high in most urban areas where you are likely to have a dev centre.
I'd say there are several locations in the UK with quite low costs (definitely massively lower than SE England). For example Glasgow. Average residential prices are 23% of London, that's a lot cheaper and there's a good level of skilled workforce there.