A proposed case for the cloud software engineering in security

This paper presents Cloud Software Engineering in Security (CSES) proposal that combines the benefits from each of good software engineering process and security. While other literature does not provide a proposal for Cloud security as yet, we use Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) to illustrate the concept of CSES from its design, implementation and test phases. BPMN can be used to raise alarm for protecting Cloud security in a real case scenario in real-time. Results from BPMN simulations show that a long execution time of 60 hours is required to protect real-time security of 2 petabytes (PB). When data is not in use, BPMN simulations show that the execution time for all data security rapidly falls off. We demonstrate a proposal to deal with Cloud security and aim to improve its current performance for Big Data

Financial Modeling and Prediction as a Service

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media DordrechtThis paper describes our proposal for Quality of Service (QoS) for Financial Modeling and Prediction as a Service (FMPaaS), since a majority of papers does not focus on SaaS level. We focus on two factors for delivering successful QoS, which are performance and accuracy for FMPaaS. The design process, theories and models behind the FMPaaS service have been explained. To support our FMPaaS service, two APIs have been developed to improve on performance and accuracy. Two major experiments have been illustrated and results show that each API processing can be completed in 2.12 seconds and 100,000 simulations can be completed in an acceptable period of time. Accuracy tests have been performed while using Facebook as an example. Three points of comparisons between actual and predicted prices have been undertaken. Results support accuracy since results are between 93.72 % and 99.63 % for Facebook. Three case studies have been used and results can support the accuracy and validity of the high level of accuracy offered by FMPaaS

Root cause analysis of project gate review failures when evaluated against a project lifecycle process methodology. (A Transnet Capital Projects Case Study)

Master’s Degree. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban.Abstract Many organisations are integrating project management as a best practice for building core competencies in the manner in which they manage and operate their businesses. Projects are initiated out of a strategic necessity, in the quest to capitalise on opportunity to advance profitability or to increase market share by providing a new value proposition. These initiatives require the investment of capital and hence it is imperative to evaluate the feasibility and sustainability of the investment before committing substantial expenditure to the project initiatives. Transnet, a state owned enterprise, embraced the project management philosophy in the management of the delivery of their capital investment infrastructure programme. Transnet developed a generic standardised Project Management Process Methodology (PLP) based on industry best practice as implemented on project phases, divided and controlled by sequences of stage gate evaluations. The company is currently experiencing a major conundrum since the inception of the PLP stage gate review methodology, in which many of the capital projects that have been evaluated against this criterion have failed. The study was undertaken to gain an understanding of the root causes and factors influencing project gate review failures through an exploratory mixed qualitative and quantitative methodology. The target population was project managers and engineers who are the users of the PLP methodology in which data was collected through interviews and a survey research instrument. The main conclusions are that the PLP methodology lacks support in the form of training, provision of sample documentation, standard templates and guidelines on how to prepare project deliverables. The gate review panel members are inconsistent in rigour, objectivity and lack competence to undertake reviews. A large proportion of the project managers and engineers (approximately 36% on average) are not competent and have a low maturity level in successfully managing large infrastructure projects. The study also attributed low quality, insufficient and incomplete business cases, project execution plans, owner’s requirement specifications, risk management plans and operational readiness plans as possible causes of gate review failures. Recommendations in the form of a project management academy which focusses on training and other development initiatives for gate review panel members and project management resources are proposed together with process and procedure reengineering. In doing so, project management processes can be improved and skills competency levels be uplifted, resulting in a lower gate review failure rate. Scope for further research in examining the role of a Project Management Office (PMO), the use of organisational project management maturity model (OPM3) and extending the study to include other industries is proposed.Abstract available in the PDF

DEVELOPMENT OF A QUALITY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT TOOL TO EVALUATE SOFTWARE USING SOFTWARE QUALITY MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICES

Organizations are constantly in search of competitive advantages in today’s complex global marketplace through improvement of quality, better affordability, and quicker delivery of products and services. This is significantly true for software as a product and service. With other things being equal, the quality of software will impact consumers, organizations, and nations. The quality and efficiency of the process utilized to create and deploy software can result in cost and schedule overruns, cancelled projects, loss of revenue, loss of market share, and loss of consumer confidence. Hence, it behooves us to constantly explore quality management strategies to deliver high quality software quickly at an affordable price. This research identifies software quality management best practices derived from scholarly literature using bibliometric techniques in conjunction with literature review, synthesizes these best practices into an assessment tool for industrial practitioners, refines the assessment tool based on academic expert review, further refines the assessment tool based on a pilot test with industry experts, and undertakes industry expert validation. Key elements of this software quality assessment tool include issues dealing with people, organizational environment, process, and technology best practices. Additionally, weights were assigned to issues of people, organizational environment, process, and technology best practices based on their relative importance, to calculate an overall weighted score for organizations to evaluate where they stand with respect to their peers in pursuing the business of producing quality software. This research study indicates that people best practices carry 40% of overall weight, organizational best v practices carry 30% of overall weight, process best practices carry 15% of overall weight, and technology best practices carry 15% of overall weight. The assessment tool that is developed will be valuable to organizations that seek to take advantage of rapid innovations in pursuing higher software quality. These organizations can use the assessment tool for implementing best practices based on the latest cutting edge management strategies that can lead to improved software quality and other competitive advantages in the global marketplace. This research contributed to the current academic literature in software quality by presenting a quality assessment tool based on software quality management best practices, contributed to the body of knowledge on software quality management, and expanded the knowledgebase on quality management practices. This research also contributed to current professional practice by incorporating software quality management best practices into a quality management assessment tool to evaluate software