Personally, I think it's a bit of a stretch. But I do think that any company considering placing an important part of its functionality offshore should reflect on the fact that terror threats are currently tending to spread rather than retreat, and in the current climate ANY foreign facility clearly linked with a major US entity might just be singled out by the nutcases:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1144564,00.html "The attack is likely to shift attention within India to the question of how well prepared the country's outsourcing centers are for terror strikes. In a press statement released immediately after the terror attack, NASSCOM, the trade body for India's technology sector, stated that the country's outsourcing companies already have many security measures in place; however, it said that the incident 'highlights the need to review and upgrade these.'" I think it vanishingly unlikely that any commercial operation - especially in outsourcing, where the gross margins are already very low - would be able to afford the kind of security measures needed to guarantee invulnerability from the kind of fanatics who could engineer 9/11. It should be on the checklist of anyone considering business critical outsourcing. -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.co.uk +44 7833 654 800 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
