Finally after a year of procrastinating I finally sat for my TOGAF exam. I’m glad I finally did it, but I should have done it much earlier.

A lot of people wonder what TOGAF really is, TOGAF is an acronym that stands for the The Open Group Architecture Framework–yes it’s a mouthful and you’ve probably never heard of it before, but I personally believe architecture is a great place to be in these days, and ever since I moved into solution architecture (slightly more than a year ago) I’ve never regretted it.

Studying for the exam was straightforward enough, and the entire exam takes about 2.5 hours, not bad in comparison for the 4 hour PMP exam or the 3.5 hours for the CCBA. However, where TOGAF slightly differs is the fact that the certification involves two exams, aptly called part 1 and part 2.

Part 1 consist of 40 multiple choice questions, and unlike most other examinations this one has 5 possible options. In my opinion this is actually the harder of the two exams, but this one is a pre-requisite for part 2. If you fail part 1, you go home.

Part 2 consist of 8 ‘complex scenario questions’, which unlike the straightforward questions in part 1 consist of a complex scenario and 4 possible answers. However, the scenarios are quite elaborate AND take time just to digest and read –let alone answer. Once you’ve digested and truly understood the question, there’s still a matter of choosing an answer from a list of 4 possible answers–the only catch is that the answers aren’t right or wrong–there is a gradient to the answers and only the ‘fully right’ answer scores you full marks, the other ‘partially right’ answer score you fewer points. The last thing to note about part 2 is that it’s open book, which is helpful only if you know where to find the information from the 700 page TOGAF documentation.

In conjuction with the release of the Government Transformation Project Annual report, the Star today reported:

The Malaysian education system is on track to becoming among the world’s best as stringent monitoring is in place to ensure its success under the Government Transformation Plan (GTP).

“The rate of improvement of the system in the last 15 years is among the fastest in the world,” the GTP report said.

Malaysia also ranks among the top in the world for equitable access to education.

So after the furore over the Malaysian Insider article that wrongly accused the Government of using spyware on its citizens, the MCMC rightly issued a press statement denouncing the article.

Unfortunately, even the MCMC has to do some reading up a bit before it post up press releases. According to the MCMC press release which you can read in it’s entirety here:

We often talk about how where the next Apple, Google or Amazon will come from, rarely do we ask ourselves where the next Red Cross or Salvation Army would come from.

What’s even rarer is the question of how we can get our local NGO and charities to stop being Jaguh Kampungs and start being real world-changers that affect change in the areas of their focus.

Dan Pallotta thinks he has the answer, but it involves giving up some of the deeply entrenched notions we have around charities are start looking at charity in a more holistic way.

A really piece written by Asohan Aryaduray on DigitalNewsAsia some time back talked about how the CyberWar between Malaysia and the Philippines was going on, and how he wanted government agencies to step up the security of our digital assets (or at least start the discussion). Asohan claims that Malaysia perhaps has “the most number of government and quasi-government agencies looking into cyber-security for a country this size; it is time for them to put their heads together and harden the nation’s cyber-defenses.” 

He ends with a rather poignant phrase: It’s war, gentlemen, and it’s time our agencies got cracking.

I’m not so sure it’s war–even less sure we should get the government involved.

If he calls the attacks by Malaysians on Pinoy websites (and vice-versa) a war, then what’s currently going on with the DAP website is a sign of not just war–but a digital civil war, with internal actors, attacking local sites.

TheStar last week reported that the:

DAP has claimed that its websites have been attacked and forced to shut down since last Friday.

National publicity secretary Tony Pua (pix)said the party’s official website, dapmalaysia.org, and its Malay portal, roketkini.com, were incapacitated by denial of service attacks (DDOS) on March 8, 10 and 13.

While TheStar doesn’t report it, but other newsportals claim Pua was blaming political foes for the attack. For the most part this is quite common, we’ve seen Malaysiakini go down a few times, and various other pro-opposition blogs have taken some hits. This of course is even more interesting because Krebsonsecurity.com blogged that he was a victim of not just a DDOS attack but Swatting as well.

I’ve been pretty busy the past few months, and my post count has been pretty low, and although I just returned from a 2 week trip abroad and am now flushed full of work, I decided to burn a bit of the midnight oil today because the Malaysian Insider completely pissed me off.

It all started with an article from Lim Kit Siangs blog, which read “Malaysia uses spyware against citizens, NYT reports”. The post was merely a cut-and-copy reproduction of a Malaysian Insider article that had the same headline. The headline really got my blood churning and it was followed up with an even more mouth watering opening paragraph:

A week ago, I wrote about the MCMC was planning to ‘monitor and control’ the internet, but just today I looked at my RSS subscription and notice that the Malay version of the press release used completely different words.

While the English version of the Press release used words like ‘monitor and control’, the Bahasa version used the term ‘memantau dan menyekat’. The term ‘memantau dan menyekat’ more appropriately translates to ‘Monitor and Block’ or ‘Monitor and Censor’ rather than ‘Monitor and Control’.

The short answer is NO.

The longer answer is HELL NO!

One of the things that pushes my buttons is when people talk about how Malaysia can produce the next Google or Facebook like as though creating a world renowned tech brand is like winning a lottery–submit enough entries and you’re bound to win it sooner or later. These people dream, and they dream a lot, from reaching 1% of the global cloud market, developing 5 companies with revenues of at least USD100 million or the most usual dream of them all–for Malaysia to produce the next Google or Facebook.

While all of the nice plushy dreams sound good to a lot of people, the reality is that Malaysia as a far away from realizing this dream as we are from winning the Football world cup–technically it is possible, but no one would be betting money on it (except possibly the Singaporean bookies).

In order to understand how a multi-billion dollar company is created, we can easily re-visit the creation stories of these companies and try to find some similarities that are common across them. So that’s what we’ll do…

Bernama (an official government news channel) yesterday reported that the MCMC is “looking at suitable methods to monitor and control the use of social media in the 13th General Election (GE13)". Deputy Information Communications and Culture Minister Datuk Maglin Dennis D’Cruz said this was “to ensure that the social media would not be abused by irresponsible quarters to achieve their own political agenda”. Datuk Maglin then quickly goes on to shameless promote the BN by saying that “Therefore, the public, especially the young voters should be wise enough to do their parts in selecting the right government with vast experience in managing the country, so that their future will be secured.”