Search Results

Search found 37348 results on 1494 pages for 'agile project management'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 79/1494 | < Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >

  • Multiple vulnerabilities in Firefox

    - by RitwikGhoshal
    CVE DescriptionCVSSv2 Base ScoreComponentProduct and Resolution CVE-2012-1960 Information Exposure vulnerability 5.0 Firefox Solaris 10 SPARC: 145080-12 X86: 145081-11 CVE-2012-1970 Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-1971 Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability 9.3 CVE-2012-1972 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-1973 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-1974 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-1975 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-1976 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3956 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3957 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3958 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3959 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3960 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3961 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3962 Arbitrary code execution vulnerability 9.3 CVE-2012-3963 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3964 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3966 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3967 Arbitrary code execution vulnerability 6.8 CVE-2012-3968 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3969 Numeric Errors vulnerability 9.3 CVE-2012-3970 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 10.0 CVE-2012-3972 Information Exposure vulnerability 5.0 CVE-2012-3974 Resource Management Errors vulnerability 6.9 CVE-2012-3976 Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability 5.8 CVE-2012-3978 Permissions, Privileges, and Access Controls vulnerability 6.8 CVE-2012-3980 Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability 9.3 This notification describes vulnerabilities fixed in third-party components that are included in Oracle's product distributions.Information about vulnerabilities affecting Oracle products can be found on Oracle Critical Patch Updates and Security Alerts page.

    Read the article

  • When to do Code Review

    - by mcass20
    We have recently moved to a scrum process and are working on tasks and user stories inside of sprints. We would like to do code reviews frequently to make them less daunting. We are thinking that doing them on a user story level but are unsure how to branch our code to account for this. We are using VS and TFS 2010 and we are a team of 6. We currently branch for features but are working on changing to branching for scrum. We do not currently use shelvesets and don't really want to implement if there are other techniques available. How do you recommend we implement code review per user story?

    Read the article

  • Nominations now open for the Oracle FMW Excellence Awards 2014

    - by Greg Jensen
    2014 Oracle Excellence Award NominationsWho Is the Innovative Leader for Identity Management? •    Is your organization leveraging one of Oracle’s Identity and Access Management solutions in your production environment?•    Are you a leading edge organization that has adopted a forward thinking approach to Identity and Access Management processes across the organization?•    Are you ready to promote and highlight the success of your deployment to your peers? •    Would you a chance to win FREE registration to Oracle OpenWorld 2014? Oracle is pleased to announce the call for nominations for the 2014 Oracle Excellence Awards: Oracle Fusion Middleware Innovation.  The Oracle Excellence Awards for Oracle Fusion Middleware Innovation honor organizations using Oracle Fusion Middleware to deliver unique business value.  This year, the awards will recognize customers across nine distinct categories, including Identity and Access Management.  Oracle customers, who feel they are pioneers in their implementation of at least one of the Oracle Identity and Access Management offerings in a production environment or active deployment, should submit a nomination.  If submitted by June 20th, 2014, you will have a chance to win a FREE registration to Oracle OpenWorld 2014 (September 28 - October 2) in San Francisco, CA.  Top customers will be showcased at Oracle OpenWorld and featured in Oracle publications.   The  Identity and Access Management Nomination Form Additional benefits to nomineesNominating your organization opens additional opportunities to partner with Oracle such as:•    Promotion of your Customer Success StoriesProvides a platform for you to share the success of your initiatives and programs to peer groups raising the overall visibility of your team and your organization as a leader in security•    Social Media promotion (Video, Blog & Podcast)Reach the masses of Oracle’s customers through sharing of success stories, or customer created blog content that highlights the advanced thought leadership role in security with co-authored articles on Oracle Blog page that reaches close to 100,000 subscribers. There are numerous options to promote activities on Facebook, Twitter and co-branded activities using Video and Audio. •    Live speaking opportunities to your peersAs a technology leader within your organization, you can represent your organization at Oracle sponsored events (online, in person or webcasts) to help share the success of your organizations efforts building out your team/organization brand and success. •    Invitation to the IDM Architect ForumOracle is able to invite the right customers into the IDM Architect Forum which is an invite only group of customers that meet monthly to hear technology driven presentations from their own peers (not from Oracle) on today’s trends.  If you want to hear privately what some of the most successful companies in every industry are doing about security, this is the forum to be in. All presentations are private and remain within the forum, and only members can see take advantage of the lessons gained from these meetings.  To date, there are 125 members. There are many more advantages to partnering with Oracle, however, it can start with the simple nomination form for Identity and Access Management category of the 2014 Oracle Excellence Award Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

    Read the article

  • Mscorlib mocking minus the attribute

    - by mehfuzh
    Mocking .net framework members (a.k.a. mscorlib) is always a daunting task. It’s the breed of static and final methods and full of surprises. Technically intercepting mscorlib members is completely different from other class libraries. This is the reason it is dealt differently. Generally, I prefer writing a wrapper around an mscorlib member (Ex. File.Delete(“abc.txt”)) and expose it via interface but that is not always an easy task if you already have years old codebase. While mocking mscorlib members first thing that comes to people’s mind is DateTime.Now. If you Google through, you will find tons of example dealing with just that. May be it’s the most important class that we can’t ignore and I will create an example using JustMock Q2 with the same. In Q2 2012, we just get rid of the MockClassAtrribute for mocking mscorlib members. JustMock is already attribute free for mocking class libraries. We radically think that vendor specific attributes only makes your code smelly and therefore decided the same for mscorlib. Now, I want to fake DateTime.Now for the following class: public class NestedDateTime { public DateTime GetDateTime() { return DateTime.Now; } } It is the simplest one that can be. The first thing here is that I tell JustMock “hey we have a DateTime.Now in NestedDateTime class that we want to mock”. To do so, during the test initialization I write this: .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Mock.Replace(() => DateTime.Now).In<NestedDateTime>(x => x.GetDateTime());.csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } I can also define it for all the members in the class, but that’s just a waste of extra watts. Mock.Replace(() => DateTime.Now).In<NestedDateTime>(); Now question, why should I bother doing it? The answer is that I am not using attribute and with this approach, I can mock any framework members not just File, FileInfo or DateTime. Here to note that we already mock beyond the three but when nested around a complex class, JustMock was not intercepting it correctly. Therefore, we decided to get rid of the attribute altogether fixing the issue. Finally, I write my test as usual. [TestMethod] public void ShouldAssertMockingDateTimeFromNestedClass() { var expected = new DateTime(2000, 1, 1); Mock.Arrange(() => DateTime.Now).Returns(expected); Assert.Equal(new NestedDateTime().GetDateTime(), expected); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } That’s it, we are good. Now let me do the same for a random one, let’s say I want mock a member from DriveInfo: Mock.Replace<DriveInfo[]>(() => DriveInfo.GetDrives()).In<MsCorlibFixture>(x => x.ShouldReturnExpectedDriveWhenMocked()); Moving forward, I write my test: [TestMethod] public void ShouldReturnExpectedDriveWhenMocked() { Mock.Arrange(() => DriveInfo.GetDrives()).MustBeCalled(); DriveInfo.GetDrives(); Mock.Assert(()=> DriveInfo.GetDrives()); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Here is one convention; you have to replace the mscorlib member before executing the target method that contains it. Here the call to DriveInfo is within the MsCorlibFixture therefore it should be defined during test initialization or before executing the test method. Hope this gives you the idea.

    Read the article

  • Extreme Programming Dying? [closed]

    - by jonny
    Is Extreme Programming Dying? I've been reviewing my fellow students reports on extreme programming.(I am a student myself) Some students are claiming that extreme programming lacks in empirical evidences, and is relevantly new, hence lacking in empirical evidence. XP is already 13 years old it should be considered as new, from my perspective. I guess the practices of XP has been tweaked and used in newer methodologies such as scrum. What are your point of view on this, do you guys think XP is Dying?

    Read the article

  • What are the boundaries of the product owner in scrum?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    In another question, I asked about why I feel scrum turns active developers into passive developers, and it seems that the overall problem is not scrumy (related to scrum), and rather it's related to the bad implementation of scrum. So, here I have some questions about the scope of the responsibilities of PO (product owner) and the limitations he/she shouldn't pass. Should PO interfere the UI design, when there are designers at work in scrum team? (an example of this which has happened to us, is to replace checkboxes with a drop down list with two items, namely, yes and no; or to make some boxes larger, or to left-align some content instead of centering them on the page, or stuff like that). If yeah, to what extent? Colors? Layout? Should PO interfere in Design and architecture of coding? This hasn't happened to us yet, but I'm really curious about the boundaries. For example does PO has the right to change the platform (moving from ASP.NET MVC to PHP, or something like that), or choosing the count of servers (tier architecture), etc. Should PO interfere in validation mechanisms? For example, this field should be required, or we don't need to get this piece of information from user. Sometimes, analyzers and designers confirm that something can be handled behind the scene, like extracting the user profile info from another source, instead of asking for it in UI. How granular could/should PO get into the analysis and design? For example, a user story might be: "As a customer, I'd like to be able to buy new domains online". However, scrum team can implement this user story in a wizard of five steps, or in one single page. To which level PO should monitor, or govern, or supervise the technical analysis, design, and implementation? I asked these questions to judge whether our implementation is right or wrong?

    Read the article

  • mongoDB Management Studio

    - by Liam McLennan
    This weekend I have been in Sydney at the MS Web Camp, learning about web application development. At the end of the first day we came up with application ideas and pitched them. My idea was to build a web management application for mongoDB. mongoDB I pitched my idea, put down the microphone, and then someone asked, “what’s mongo?”. Good question. MongoDB is a document database that stores JSON style documents. This is a JSON document for a tweet from twitter: db.tweets.find()[0] { "_id" : ObjectId("4bfe4946cfbfb01420000001"), "created_at" : "Thu, 27 May 2010 10:25:46 +0000", "profile_image_url" : "http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/600304197/Snapshot_2009-07-26_13-12-43_normal.jpg", "from_user" : "drearyclocks", "text" : "Does anyone know who has better coverage, Optus or Vodafone? Telstra is still too expensive.", "to_user_id" : null, "metadata" : { "result_type" : "recent" }, "id" : { "floatApprox" : 14825648892 }, "geo" : null, "from_user_id" : 6825770, "search_term" : "telstra", "iso_language_code" : "en", "source" : "&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tweetdeck.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;TweetDeck&lt;/a&gt;" } A mongodb server can have many databases, each database has many collections (instead of tables) and a collection has many documents (instead of rows). Development Day 2 of the Sydney MS Web Camp was allocated to building our applications. First thing in the morning I identified the stories that I wanted to implement: Scenario: View databases Scenario: View Collections in a database Scenario: View Documents in a Collection Scenario: Delete a Collection Scenario: Delete a Database Scenario: Delete Documents Over the course of the day the team (3.5 developers) implemented all of the planned stories (except ‘delete a database’) and also implemented the following: Scenario: Create Database Scenario: Create Collection Lessons Learned I’m new to MongoDB and in the past I have only accessed it from Ruby (for my hare-brained scheme). When it came to implementing our MongoDB management studio we discovered that their is no official MongoDB driver for .NET. We chose to use NoRM, honestly just because it was the only one I had heard of. NoRM was a challenge. I think it is a fine library but it is focused on mapping strongly typed objects to MongoDB. For our application we had no prior knowledge of the types that would be in the MongoDB database so NoRM was probably a poor choice. Here are some screens (click to enlarge):

    Read the article

  • Working with multiple interfaces on a single mock.

    - by mehfuzh
    Today , I will cover a very simple topic, which can be useful in cases we want to mock different interfaces on our expected mock object.  Our target interface is simple and it looks like:   public interface IFoo : IDisposable {     void Do(); } Now, as we can see that our target interface has implemented IDisposable and in normal cases if we have to implement it in class where language rules require use to implement that as well[no doubt about it] and whether or not there can be more complex cases, we want to ensure that rather having an extra call(..As()) or constructs to prepare it for us, we should do it in the simplest way possible. Therefore, keeping that in mind, first we create a mock of IFoo var foo = Mock.Create<IFooDispose>(); Then, as we are interested with IDisposable, we simply do: var iDisposable = foo as IDisposable;   Finally, we proceed with our existing mock code. Considering the current context, we I will check if the dispose method has invoked our mock code successfully.   bool called = false;   Mock.Arrange(() => iDisposable.Dispose()).DoInstead(() => called = true);     iDisposable.Dispose();   Assert.True(called);   Further, we assert our expectation as follows: Mock.Assert(() => iDisposable.Dispose(), Occurs.Once());   Hopefully that will help a bit and stay tuned. Enjoy!!

    Read the article

  • Is writing software in the absence of requirements a skill to possess or a situation I should avoid?

    - by Brian Reindel
    I find that some software developers are very adept at this, and often times are praised for their ability to deliver a working concept with abstract requirements. Frankly, this drives me crazy, and I don't like "making it up" as I go. I used to think this was problematic, but I've started to sense a shift, and I'm wondering if I need to adjust my thought (and programming) process when given very little direction. Should I begin to acquire this ability as a skill, or stick to the idea that requirement's gathering and business rules are the first priority?

    Read the article

  • How to handle estimates for programmers joining the team?

    - by Jordan
    Iteration has already started, new programmer joins the team, task X has already been estimated to be 30 hours by a different developer. What is the best practice in this situation? new developer runs with the given estimate (the idea being that any discrepancy will be corrected for when velocity is calculated?) new developer re-estimates task? (if so, what if it's significantly higher and no longer fits in the iteration?) throw our hands up and go back to waterfall? something else entirely?

    Read the article

  • How to guide stakeholder(s) not to get far from the scrum vision?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    Consider this scenario: Stakeholder(s): Let's build a web application to manage user's financial data. Scrum team: Ok, let's do it. . . . After 3 sprints Stakeholder(s): Let's also implement a mailing system, so that when user's financial status is not good, (s)he would be warned. Scrum team: Ok, it's not that hard. We'll do it. . . . After 5 sprints Stakholder(s): Let's become a mailing provider. Here, how should scrum team guide stakeholder to stay inside the scope of scrum vision? Maybe a more fundamental question is, should the at all? Update: Of course there is a product owner. But by scrum team I meant PO, SM, and Team.

    Read the article

  • The Business Case for a Platform Approach

    - by Naresh Persaud
    Most customers have assembled a collection of Identity Management products over time, as they have reacted to industry regulations, compliance mandates and security threats, typically selecting best of breed products.  The resulting infrastructure is a patchwork of systems that has served the short term IDM goals, but is overly complex, hard to manage and cannot scale to meets the needs of the future social/mobile enterprise. The solution is to rethink Identity Management as a Platform, rather than individual products. Aberdeen Research has shown that taking a vendor integrated platform approach to Identity Management can reduce cost, make your IT organization more responsive to the needs of a changing business environment, and reduce audit deficiencies.  View the slide show below to see how companies like Agilent, Cisco, ING Bank and Toyota have all built the business case and embraced the Oracle Identity Management Platform approach. Biz case-keynote-final copy View more PowerPoint from OracleIDM

    Read the article

  • Running Objects – Associations and Relationships

    - by edurdias
    After the introduction to the Running Objects with the tutorial Movie Database in 2 Minutes (available here), I would like to demonstrate how Running Objects interprets the Associations where we will cover: Direct Association – A reference to another complex object. Aggregation – A collection of another complex object. For those coming with a database perspective, by demonstrating these associations we will also exemplify the underline relationships such as 1 to Many and Many to Many relationships...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Code review versus pair programming

    - by mericano1
    I was wondering what is the general idea about code review and pair programming. I do have my own opinion but I'd like to hear from somebody else as well. Here are a few questions, please give me your opinion even on some of the point First of all are you aware of way to measure the effectiveness of this practices? Do you think that if you pair program, code reviews are not necessary or it's still good to have them both? Do you think anybody can do code review or maybe is better done by seniors only? In terms of productivity do you think it suffers from pairing all the times or you will eventually get in back in the long run?

    Read the article

  • Partner Blog Series: PwC Perspectives - Looking at R2 for Customer Organizations

    - by Tanu Sood
    Welcome to the first of our partner blog series. November Mondays are all about PricewaterhouseCoopers' perespective on Identity and R2. In this series, we have identity management experts from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) share their perspective on (and experiences with) the recent identity management release, Oracle Identity Management R2. The purpose of the series is to discuss real world identity use cases that helped shape the innovations in the recent R2 release and the implementation strategies that customers are employing today with expertise from PwC. Part 1: Looking at R2 for Customer Organizations In this inaugural post, we will discuss some of the new features of the R2 release of Oracle Identity Manager that some of our customer organizations are implementing today and the business rationale for those. Oracle's R2 Security portfolio represents a solid step forward for a platform that is already market-leading.  Prior to R2, Oracle was an industry titan in security with reliable products, expansive compatibility, and a large customer base.  Oracle has taken their identity platform to the next level in their latest version, R2.  The new features include a customizable UI, a request catalog, flexible security, and enhancements for its connectors, and more. Oracle customers will be impressed by the new Oracle Identity Manager (OIM) business-friendly UI.  Without question, Oracle has invested significant time in responding to customer feedback about making access requests and related activities easier for non-IT users.  The flexibility to add information to screens, hide fields that are not important to a particular customer, and adjust web themes to suit a company's preference make Oracle's Identity Manager stand out among its peers.  Customers can also expect to carry UI configurations forward with minimal migration effort to future versions of OIM.  Oracle's flexible UI will benefit many organizations looking for a customized feel with out-of-the-box configurations. Organizations looking to extend their services to end users will benefit significantly from new usability features like OIM’s ‘Catalog.’  Customers familiar with Oracle Identity Analytics' 'Glossary' feature will be able to relate to the concept.  It will enable Roles, Entitlements, Accounts, and Resources to be requested through the out-of-the-box UI.  This is an industry-changing feature as customers can make the process to request access easier than ever.  For additional ease of use, Oracle has introduced a shopping cart style request interface that further simplifies the experience for end users.  Common requests can be setup as profiles to save time.  All of this is combined with the approval workflow engine introduced in R1 that provides the flexibility customers need to meet their compliance requirements. Enhanced security was also on the list of features Oracle wanted to deliver to its customers.  The new end-user UI provides additional granular access controls.  Common Help Desk use cases can be implemented with ease by updating the application profiles.  Access can be rolled out so that administrators can only manage a certain department or organization.  Further, OIM can be more easily configured to select which fields can be read-only vs. updated.  Finally, this security model can be used to limit search results for roles and entitlements intended for a particular department.  Every customer has a different need for access and OIM now matches this need with a flexible security model. One of the important considerations when selecting an Identity Management platform is compatibility.  The number of supported platform connectors and how well it can integrate with non-supported platforms is a key consideration for selecting an identity suite.  Oracle has a long list of supported connectors.  When a customer has a requirement for a platform not on that list, Oracle has a solution too.  Oracle is introducing a simplified architecture called Identity Connector Framework (ICF), which holds the potential to simplify custom connectors.  Finally, Oracle has introduced a simplified process to profile new disconnected applications from the web browser.  This is a useful feature that enables administrators to profile applications quickly as well as empowering the application owner to fulfill requests from their web browser.  Support will still be available for connectors based on previous versions in R2. Oracle Identity Manager's new R2 version has delivered many new features customers have been asking for.  Oracle has matured their platform with R2, making it a truly distinctive platform among its peers. In our next post, expect a deep dive into use cases for a customer considering R2 as their new Enterprise identity solution. In the meantime, we look forward to hearing from you about the specific challenges you are facing and your experience in solving those. Meet the Writers Dharma Padala is a Director in the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has been implementing medium to large scale Identity Management solutions across multiple industries including utility, health care, entertainment, retail and financial sectors.   Dharma has 14 years of experience in delivering IT solutions out of which he has been implementing Identity Management solutions for the past 8 years. Scott MacDonald is a Director in the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has consulted for several clients across multiple industries including financial services, health care, automotive and retail.   Scott has 10 years of experience in delivering Identity Management solutions. John Misczak is a member of the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  He has experience implementing multiple Identity and Access Management solutions, specializing in Oracle Identity Manager and Business Process Engineering Language (BPEL). Jenny (Xiao) Zhang is a member of the Advisory Security practice within PwC.  She has consulted across multiple industries including financial services, entertainment and retail. Jenny has three years of experience in delivering IT solutions out of which she has been implementing Identity Management solutions for the past one and a half years. Praveen Krishna is a Manager in the Advisory  Security practice within PwC.  Over the last decade Praveen has helped clients plan, architect and implement Oracle identity solutions across diverse industries.  His experience includes delivering security across diverse topics like network, infrastructure, application and data where he brings a holistic point of view to problem solving.

    Read the article

  • Creating Multiple Queries for Running Objects

    - by edurdias
    Running Objects combines the power of LINQ with Metadata definition to let you leverage multiples perspectives of your queries of objects. By default, RO brings all the objects in natural order of insertion and including all the visible properties of your class. In this post, we will understand how the QueryAttribute class is structured and how to make use of it. The QueryAttribute class This class is the responsible to specify all the possible perspectives of a list of objects. In other words, is...(read more)

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >