Posted by: Derek Kuhr
Oracle applications, Oracle database administration
A news story we posted last week about Oracle’s new Audit Vault software generated a strongly worded response from Cliff Pollan, the CEO of Lumigent, one of Oracle’s competitors in the governance, risk and compliance (GRC) market. Thankfully, the response was directed at Oracle, rather than yours truly, as I’m very fragile.
Here’s what Pollan had to say:
“The release of Oracle Audit Vault comes as no surprise to the database auditing and compliance marketplace as Oracle has been discussing this project for almost a year. But this offering is quite limited in both features and scope. Audit Vault is a 1.0 release in a mature market and can only be used for a subset of Oracle databases. It does not address the number one concern of enterprise customers – the need to audit in a multi-vendor environment. Strategic applications span a variety of database systems including not only Oracle but also IBM, Microsoft and Sybase. Sophisticated customers have moved well past these basics and are now implementing solutions that leverage the audit repositories to build a sustainable compliance process. Most feel a high degree of urgency and I am not sure they have time to wait until Oracle can provide the depth of functionality that is needed now.”
Now, back on my middle school playground, those were fighting words. But what really jumped out at me about this quote had to do with the fact that we reported that Oracle plans to widen Audit Vault’s support for non-Oracle systems sometime within the next year. So I brought this to Pollan’s attention and he had this to add:
“For over five years, Lumigent has been hearing from our installed base of more than 500 clients of the critical need for multi-vendor support in their auditing, compliance and security. Users appreciate an independent vendor who has made the flexibility of multi-vendor support a priority. Oracle’s Audit Vault does not provide this today, and Oracle has not been clear on exactly how they plan to support non-Oracle databases on their own in the future.”
Does Pollan have a point? Let us know.
– Mark Brunelli, News Editor