SAP and Swinburne Uni target BPM privacy

 

Information on a need-to-know basis.

Researchers from Swinburne University in Melbourne and Brisbane-based SAP Research Centre, are working on a project that will allow Business Process Management software to share information on a need-to-know basis.

Business process management (BPM) applications provide large companies with a single view of all the activities and resources required to create a product or service for a customer.

Often, the products required sharing of information with third parties but it was claimed traditional systems weren't flexible enough to provide data on a need-to-know basis.

Researchers said that meant corporate secrets were often unnecessarily exposed.

Xiaohui Zhao, a postdoctoral fellow at the university and a researcher on the project, dubbed 'Kaleidoscope', said that traditional BPM applications offered only a "share all-or-nothing" option.

"Once the business process is defined, the traditional approach just releases [all the information] to all of the partners. This means that sometimes, confidential or private information will be released," said Zhao.

Professor Chengfei Liu, a program leader at Swinburne Uni's Centre for Complex Software Systems and Services, agreed with Zhao.

"Those kinds of issues are serious and haven't been addressed by previous business process management systems," said Liu.

The project started in July 2007. There was no firm date on when it would be completed.


SAP and Swinburne Uni target BPM privacy
 
 
 
Top Stories
Feeling Shellshocked?
Stay up to date with patching for the Bash bug.
 
Amazon forced to reboot EC2 to patch Xen bug
Rolling restarts over next week.
 
Vodafone reveals plans to store users' online activity
Says retrieval under Govt proposal will impose massive cost.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest Comments
Polls
Which is the most prevalent cyber attack method your organisation faces?




   |   View results
Phishing and social engineering
  66%
 
Advanced persistent threats
  4%
 
Unpatched or unsupported software vulnerabilities
  11%
 
Denial of service attacks
  6%
 
Insider threats
  12%
TOTAL VOTES: 1349

Vote