Regarding this Top Prediction:

By the end of 2007, 75 percent of enterprises will be infected with undetected, financially motivated, targeted malware that evaded their traditional perimeter and host defenses.

Are these attacks well organized?

What is the most common origin of these attacks?

Do you see actual efforts coming from national or nongovernmental organizations?

Do we have a position on nationally sponsored efforts to undermine enterprises or governmental organizations from a financial perspective?

7 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink

Ken,

Well, I'll start the discussion with a couple of comments on our prediction ("Through 2011, enterprises will waste $100 billion buying the wrong networking technologies and services"), and we'll see where this goes.

Our "$100 billion telecom waste" prediction basically hits a common theme: Network architects continue to follow well-understood but totally outdated design principles. As network technology caught up to the demands of applications, "bigger and faster" was a good approach to building the next network. Today, that's not the case - we have to think differently if we're going to utilize new benefits of network and communication technologies. $100 billion is the wake-up call: The benefit is not saving money but rather using networking technology as an enabler to do new things for the organization.

2 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink

French, John,

I’d like to get the ball rolling based upon your prediction:

By 2009, corporate social responsibility (CSR) will be a higher board- and executive-level priority than regulatory compliance.

I am concerned whenever I see recommendations pertaining to efforts supporting “quality of life” goals, improving living standards and so on. Whose standards and definitions are employed to determine which CSR goals are worthy of pursuing? Do you foresee a scenario in which a well-meaning company pursuing Western-based ethical goals may unknowingly conflict with the local ethos of a community that finds those goals unsuitable?

Also, how do clients avoid the appearance of being disingenuous? If it were not for some financial gain, would CSR be pursued with the same vigor? I am not saying such pursuits are not worthy, I am merely asking if your prediction would come true with as much certainty if few or no financial rewards were waiting at the end of the rainbow.

Surely you have encountered sincere and well-meaning executives who are getting on the bandwagon, but what percentage of the Global 2000 are such altruistic people?

15 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink