I had planned to talk about BYOD and mobile technology later in my series on Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) approaches, but this recent announcement from EMC cries out for a brief mention. EMC has recently acquired cloud file sharing and syncing service Syncplicity. There is some speculation in some of the news reports that this might be part of a play to improve the mobile and file sharing aspects of Documentum, an EMC document management and enterprise content management system. My hope, however, is that Syncplicity is added into the already strong VMware end user computing story. VMware’s project octopus is a very interesting story for sharing files within an organisation. It is basically a “corporate dropbox”: an on-premise solution for sharing files across multiple devices, including mobile ones, securely. At this time however, the security of the data on the device is limited. Syncplicity’s encryption and control of data in motion and at rest on the device, and while stored in the repository might just be the thing that moves octopus into an enterprise grade, secure product. Syncplicity appears to store data on the device inside some form of AES-256 encrypted container, and has a facility for independently securing and remotely wiping the container. This is a facility that octopus lacks at this time, but sorely needs. So here’s hoping that this sort of cross-pollination between the EMC family of companies and acquisitions continues.
This is my fifth post on Bring Your Own Device (BYOD). In other posts I’ve considered support and managing employee expenses. Here, I want to change tack a bit, and ask: What are the ramifications of consumer law for BYOD? While this may seem like a strange question, it is something that you will need to consider for some types of BYOD.
This is the fourth post in my series on BYOD. In my previous post on expense management I looked at how an organisation can pay for, or reimburse employees who pay for, the use of standard mobile services (voice and data) within a BYOD approach. What I had momentarily forgotten was the other key area of expenses that we face in the BYOD space – paying for apps. The problem with apps is similar. In order to make the most of smartphones and tablets users need access to apps – and many of these come at a cost. How does an organisation make sure that users have the apps they need?
This is the third post in my series on Bring Your Own Device approaches to end user computing. In my first article I enumerated the different types of approaches you can take to BYOD. In my second post I talked about different support models for BYOD. In this article I want to examine options around managing the expenses of employees who bring their own devices.
In an earlier post I talked about what Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) is. In this series of short posts I want to explore some of the issues around implementing BYOD in an enterprise – something I am currently thinking and working on – starting with support.
If yours is a traditional enterprise IT shop then support for end user devices will be performed by an internal or outsourced service desk. For mobile phones (including smartphones) this support will often be outsourced to a Communications Service Provider (CSP) who provides a complete solution: device, and voice and data services. How is this going to work if the device being used by your employees is owned and managed by them, and not your enterprise?
Much noise has been made about the consumerisation of IT and its effect on enterprise IT shops. One of the biggest aspects of the consumerisation of IT is the idea of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD). As I am heavily involved in a number of significant BYOD initiatives I thought I’d discuss some of the issues it raises, starting with this discussion of what I think BYOD is, and what I think are the different types of BYOD.
This week I was lucky enough to attend the New Zealand Identity Conference 2012: Managing Digital Identity in a Networked World. Organised by the Victoria University of Wellington, School of Government; The Office of the Privacy Commissioner; and the Department of Internal Affairs, it was held at Te Papa (The Museum of New Zealand) and pulled together identity and privacy experts from New Zealand and the rest of the world. I found it very interesting and valuable, so I just thought I’d post an overview here, and then explore thinking inspired by the conference in other posts.
A recent article on ReadWriteWeb reminded me of one of the more annoying sources of noise about cloud computing – the double standards of US government agencies and companies around cloud data residency. On the one hand US government agencies complain that other countries are discriminating against its cloud service providers by raising legitimate concerns about data privacy in the US, while at the same time as making Google create special government clouds which keep all data in the US.