Cohesity Data Cloud is not unique in this area. There are a couple of other vendors who are playing in the same area. They provide some sort of isolation for the protected data that makes it very difficult, almost impossible to tamper with once it is stored on the platform. One of the major issues of ransomware attacks is that they happen in the background and it is too late after being hit. Giving a hard time for bad actors to access the data provides more immunity for your data from ransomware attacks. All organizations are very interested in as-a-service model where they do not pay upfront costs, but only get the services and pay for what they use. Converting from CapEx to OpEx is the ultimate goal for any financial manager in any organization. The model uses some sort of object storage for the backup data and contents, which gives a better level of safety than the traditional file system because normally the object storage is not subject to alteration. The only concern I have with cloud implementation is that if you have a presence on-premises, trying to use the cloud may become a performance challenge. It is a perfect situation for workloads that live in the cloud. The way I design things is we should not send data across the WAN to the cloud if it is a large volume that could potentially affect performance. A cloud solution is ideal for a cloud workload from Cohesity Data Cloud perspective. It is best to have some sort of local presence of a repository to do the backup using LAN performance. Then we can always send or upload the data to the cloud without impacting the actual backup window. Support for additional platforms and the option to do multi-tier performance would be beneficial. For example, if I have three types of workloads - SAP database, Oracle database, and SQL database - each with different backup window requirements, the ability to tier performance to meet these specific needs would be perfect for the actual workload and meeting the availability requirements of each application domain. The general perception is if it is not broken, do not fix it. In most cases, organizations do not see value for security until they are hit with something bad. With ever-increasing threats and risks of ransomware and data theft, the problem is becoming more obvious. Looking at what is happening in the market and seeing organizations being hit by security threats, the level of loss of services and client dissatisfaction makes security investment worthwhile. There is no real tangible ROI for security, but considering the potential of losing data forever or having it exposed unnecessarily to the market, it is worth the investment. The bad actors and risks are always reinventing themselves, so we must reinvent our security posture.
