We're coming to the end of our multi-cloud data protection Crowdchat! Thanks very much for your participation. Ping us for follow up -- or new ideas for Crowdchats.
1. Wikibon believes that digital businesses are different because they treat data as an asset. That would suggest that data protection in a digital business is tantamount to digital business protection. Comments? http://www.via-cc.at...
agreed. And dig bus data protection has more intense requirements. Across the board. We’re entering the era of user experience and that means always on (for real)
Business protection is a broad concern that focuses on high availability, disaster recovery, backup and restore, and the like. If we regard "digital" assets as the heart of that, and "data" as the core of "digital" assets, they're tantamount.
Agree wholeheartedly. I keep hearing people saying "Data is gold" and see businesses leveraging "traditional backup data" for next-gen use cases like AI, ML, TDM, Analytics, etc.
But let's look at business protection more broadly as protecting business processes--both front-end/customer-facing and back-end manufacturing/logistics etc--from going down. Data is part of that, but hardware, software, connectivity, etc are just as key.
Data environment are becoming too complex for human operators.In just one industry, five airlines had major outages. Delta, British Airways, JetBlue, Southwest, and United
3. Who leads data protection decisions? Leadership could come from technology (CIOs), operations (COOs), digital heads (DDigiOs), Chief Data Officers, or elsewhere, but what role is in charge and who will drive alignment? http://www.via-cc.at...
Our CIOs are telling us that they still "own" the issue of data protection and orchestration, despite the swirl of questions regarding CxO responsibilities for data assets.
But, more generally, any C-level exec that has their own apps, databases, and so forth may lead data protection decisions relevant to assets their org owns/controls.
Old meaning of Security: Protect against loss, malicious, innocent and/or inadvertent access to or distribution of data that can cause damage. Isolate organizational entities from each other. To throttle activity by managing from scarcity
I agree that they own it, but there are so many nuances and details that it seems unrealistic for them to know them all. I think that they probably take a higher level view and leave the details to others.
heads of application development are a key constituency imo regarding the resiliency of an app. Data has different value for different apps and the application owners should be involved and represent the LoB Requirements
It's going to be an issue of that rubber producing skid marks in any enterprise where all roads to data protection don't converge on a single C-level exec: the CDO (or equivalent).
Multiple roles: CXO and LOB to establish SLAs and investment; CIO/CTO to establish data protection recovery architecture, IT Operations to make it work enterprise wide.
New meaning of security: Securing that useful and important analysis will not be missed as a result of too restrictive and or misappropriated restrictions, usually as a result of a lack of shared understanding between data stewards and, for example, data scientists
@JLivens "Security" has always been restrictive, often in dysfunctional ways, limiting analysts' access to data and driven by simplistic rules and models.
@NeilRaden I completely agree with that. It feels like the security live in a world where only security matters and there is little room for business value. There has to be a balance.
2. Cloud promises elasticity and reach, but how is that compromised if data encounters vendor-imposed cloud barriers that restrict the free-flow of information between clouds and cloud-based applications? http://www.via-cc.at...
Use cases matter. Business value, security and traffic costs should be the top considerations before walking willy-nilly into unrestricted free flow of data.
Well that is the cloud challenge. The more you use proprietary cloud tools, the harder it is to become cloud agnostic. Of course cloud providers, want to lock you in. The choice comes down to the user....
The further you get from IaaS the more locked in you get. For example using database as a service, you all of a sudden lose access to functionality that you might want. The further down you go in proprietary services, the harder it is to "escape"
Business elasticity and reach are the ability to adapt. A big part of adaption is the ability to add new data sources, aggregate and correlate, and share data across domain boundaries.Any barriers to that free flow within hybrid clouds is a killer to adaption.
Yes this is a big problem because cloud is a big silo of remote services. Fromna data protection standpoint, what’s required is a platform that can span multiple clouds including on-Prem. While at the same time supporting the granularity of apps across the portfolio
@jameskobielus True, but it raises an interesting question. Cloud vendors will say that their proprietary offerings are more efficient and cost effective, and they very well could be. But once you go proprietary, it is hard to migrate.
Choice of Cloud Partners and data protection technology is critical to ensuring an end-to-end data protection architecture. Backup is one thing, recovery (and testing recovery) is everything.
@RalphFinos@dvellante Yes, I agree with you both 100%. It is the big challenge. I worry that not everyone thinks about this though. Then you get locked in and wonder what happened.
@dvellante Agree 110%. Organizations must consider "future-proofing" themselves with a data protection platform that enables them to adapt to cloud changes (price, functionality, new features, etc.)
In that case, protecting the multi-cloud data integration fabric becomes the priority. That can get really kludgy if, say, you have two or more public clouds integrated with your private cloud and you're writing lots of custom code for that.
As a storage specialist, this is going to be a nightmare for management and control. There's too many things going on to effectively let data run free.
@JLivens As the API economy picks up speed, your data won't be locked into public cloud siloes as long as they all expose their APIs so you can suck back all your data as needed.
@jameskobielus Certainly one that supports multiple clouds, as well as a mechanism to move that data between clouds, while still providing efficiencies like incremental forever backup, instant recovery from cloud object, etc.
9. Longer term, do you see data protection and orchestration capabilities as a feature in other products? Or as a central service that other investments will have to support? http://www.via-cc.at...
Last question of this Crowdchat, and an important one: Is data protection a peripheral or central issue to data-first IT capabilities? Wikibon thinks central.
I think that you need a comprehensive view of data protection as @dvellante mentioned earlier, it needs to be architected in from the beginning. The process can be complex and so I think that there can be a strong benefit to a central service.
In a multi-cloud world, this has to be a central service - at least in the near term - to establish and employ best practices for each enterprise. Tools are not there yet to diffuse this capability to multiple decision and execution points in the enterprise.
Data protection is clearly the central concern in data-first IT capabilties. In terms of algorithmic accountabilty for data-driven decisions etc., you need to protect (archive, backup, restore, secure) as much as you need to respond to mandates, etd .like GDPR
The latter. The data is already there. Now there needs to be other apps / platforms that can integrate with the data provider to extrapolate the value of that data.
#cloudprotection
