Archives

Now in our third decade of technology marketing in Silicon Valley, we’ve been exposed to our unfair share of linguistically challenging content and mind-numbing jargon.

You’d think we would have been de-sensitized at this point.  But a recent email containing a slew of cringe-worthy zingers inspired this blog posting.  It was as if we were previewing a script for a sitcom on “Valley Technobabble”.  Like us, even the laugh track was groaning.

No matter how many times we call it out, tortured business language continues to pollute even the simplest communications.  Like cockroaches, taxes and acronyms, it just won’t go away.

The peculiar dialect now permeating every avenue of communications is something that might be best described as “Silicon Valley Speak”, a bewildering vocabulary that redefines (or it is “defies”) grammar, tramples well-established definitions and creates an entirely new glossary of befuddling terminology that would leave even Anthony Burgess, author of A Clockwork Orange, slack-jawed.

What punched our buttons in the aforementioned email was the word “onboarding”.  No, this is not a variation on the CIA’s torture tactics, but it might as well be linguistically.  The term may not exactly be new, but with all due respect to HR folks, do we really need yet another ham-handed concept to convey “a systematic and comprehensive approach to orienting a new employee to help them ‘get on board’”?  What happened to “hiring” or “orientation”?

Alas, we’re not alone in our incredulity at the insidious invasion of the “jargon-slingers”.  Credit goes to Christopher Steiner for creating that gem.  He penned one of the funniest and most astute articles titled The Most Annoying Business Jargon that takes the business world to task for “cutting its anchors to the English language.”

Let’s face it.  We’ve all heard the usual suspect lingo clanging around web sites, press releases, conference presentations and the like.  But do we have to stand for it?  At Write Angle, we certainly hope not.

To quote Mr. Steiner, “Let the jargon slinger know that you know who they are:  a vapid, message-clouding, English-avoiding, communications nightmare.”

Amen to that.

What SV-speak do you hear around the cubes or watering holes these days that cause you to cringe? What do you do to stamp it out?

It’s an interesting question we were asked to address in developing a recent white paper on behalf of our client AppSense .

While first-generation solutions to the BYOD problem have focused on locking down personal and corporate-owned devices, it’s become increasingly clear that IT departments have been mostly unprepared for the explosion of mobile computing and the avalanche of apps coinciding with the mobile revolution.

Recent studies estimate that 200 million workers are using mobile apps for business today. This strongly suggests that the consumer mobile experience has paved the way for the mobile workforce not only to expect, but demand access to data and apps from anywhere.

What does this all mean in the grand scheme of things?  Forward-looking organizations are moving from a lock-down approach to providing users access to apps and data they demand and require, anytime and anywhere.

AppSense dubs this new approach “BYOX” –  providing security and control anywhere they’re needed, regardless of device, without adversely affecting the user experience.

Check out our “nine big ideas” that will be instrumental in driving the next generation of mobility management solutions.

© Elnur

Our security client Fortinet asked us to compose a bylined thought-leadership piece on why cybercrime continues to be big business.  Appearing in Forbes , the article takes an unflinching look at why cybercrime is growing in  magnitude and sophistication.  The two driving factors are the consumerization of crimeware and the adoption of best business practices by crime syndicates worldwide.

Perhaps most alarming is the fact that crime syndicates are using an “enterprise-class” approach to growing their business.  The structure of these syndicates, in many respects, mirrors the hierarchies of big organizations right down to the executive suite, middle management and the rank and file.

When you couple the growing organizational sophistication of crime syndicates with the explosion in cloud computing, social networking, BYOD and mobile communications, cybercriminals have an unprecedented smorgasbord of attack vectors to choose from.

And like most well managed for-profit enterprises, crime syndicates maintain extensive R&D organizations.  Custom-order code to produce private botnets, fake anti-virus software and previously unseen deployment systems are just a handful of new schemes being developed in off-the-grid labs.

But the similarities syndicates share with the corporate world don’t end there.  Taking a page out of Wall Street, crime syndicates are actively engaging in mergers and acquisitions to grow their botnets through the use of another organization’s best practices.

Blurring the lines of best practices even further, we’re now seeing creative profit-sharing flair as crime syndicates grow sophisticated, pay-per-click/install/purchase affiliate programs.  Up and coming cybercriminal affiliates are now being rewarded on a performance-based pay scale.

So what’s to be done about all of this?  Clearly, working groups and task forces are essential to stem the tide.  But despite some high profile take-downs, these efforts are a drop in the bucket.

The bottom line is that global participation is a necessity.  International bodies that can mediate disputes and dispatch resources to share information about cybercrime trends are mandatory.  In addition, the Achilles heel of cybercrime needs to be attacked — and that means going after the cash flow.  Affiliate programs need to be targeted because they’re the cash cows that pay out commissions and rewards to the “infantry” that carry out malicious attacks.  Dry up the well and the rest of food chain withers.

Of course, there is no practical substitute for implementing a highly layered security strategy, assessing potential security flaws on a regular basis, and educating users about security best practices while having incident response plans and enforceable policy mechanisms in place.

What do you think? Can cybercrime ever be contained? What needs to happen to enable a lower incidence of “incidents”? What can the private and public sectors do, separately and in tandem, to make it harder for bad guys to ply their trade?