The velocity of enterprise technology adoption across Southeast Asia has completely outpaced most businesses’ wildest expectations. Reflecting on the landscape just a few short years ago, the market was gripped by the initial heat of generative AI and basic conversational chatbots. By the mid-2010s, those elementary systems were swiftly muscled out by more integrated AI assistants capable of retrieving data and drafting contextual responses.

Yet, technology waits for no corporate roadmap. The era of the simple AI assistant is already giving way to a much more powerful paradigm. Today, autonomous AI agents have taken the throne. Unlike their predecessors, which required constant human prompting and supervision, AI agents possess reasoning capabilities, planning skills, and the autonomy to execute complex, multi-step workflows across disparate business units. For enterprises relying on Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software across Singapore, Malaysia, and the wider region, this evolution demands a fundamental reassessment of core business architecture.

The unstoppable rise of the autonomous workforce 

The trend of deploying AI agents to boost operational efficiency, automate supply chains, and optimize financial forecasting is unstoppable. Organizations are no longer viewing AI as a peripheral add-on; it is fast becoming the primary user of enterprise software. This behavioral shift is forcing a radical reimagining of how software is valued and commercialized.

Globally, tech pioneers are proposing a departure from traditional seat-based licensing. When Microsoft executives floated the idea of shifting software pricing models from a “per human user” basis to a “per AI agent” structure, it sent shockwaves through the B2B technology ecosystem. Shortly thereafter, another regional enterprise software leader, Multiable, echoes similar thoughts. However, the most progressive conversations are moving beyond mere monetization strategies. The real focus for forward-thinking organizations has shifted to a much more critical question: What are the necessary architectural factors of a successful ERP system in the agentic AI era?

The existential threat of legacy B2B architecture 

The answer to that question exposes an existential threat to a vast majority of regional B2B software vendors. Across major Asian business regions—including Singapore, Malaysia and other SEA countries—the legacy software market has long been dominated by restrictive, closed-system designs. Historically, many local and regional vendors built proprietary platforms that deliberately locked customers into their ecosystems. Under these outdated models, organizations cannot carry out critical system customizations without the direct, paid presence of the software vendor.

Worse still, this closed architecture introduces a crippling technical debt. Once a business pays for a bespoke customization, the modified system is frequently severed from the vendor’s core upgrade path. The “customized” ERP software can no longer receive automatic patches, security updates, or new feature rollouts. While this inconvenient truth is well-known among legacy software providers, it is rarely highlighted to prospective buyers. Vendors have long relied on this friction to maintain a monopoly over their clients’ IT budgets, fearing that true interoperability would cause them to lose business to more agile, modern competitors. In the era of autonomous AI agents, this closed-door strategy is no longer just inconvenient—it is fatal to business agility.

Also read: Why Singapore manufacturers must embrace MES for the future

The three pillars of agent-ready ERP software

To understand why legacy systems fail in the current technological climate, one must look at the technical requirements of autonomous AI. For an ERP platform to seamlessly support an AI workforce, it must be “agent-ready.” Industry consensus points to three non-negotiable architectural elements:

1. Open Development Frameworks: The underlying software architecture must allow internal developers and third-party systems to build, modify, and extend functionalities without disrupting the core codebase.
2. Comprehensive Application Programming Interfaces (APIs): Robust, secure, and granular APIs must expose every critical business function—from ledger entries to inventory tracking—allowing external entities to programmatically read and write data.
3. Meticulous Documentation: Development guides and API registries must be comprehensively documented, publicly accessible, or structured in a way that machine-learning models can easily parse and understand.

When measured against these strict criteria, the number of truly viable software vendors drops dramatically. The vast majority of legacy ERP options deployed throughout Singapore and Malaysia simply do not possess this level of openness.

To defend their market share, lagging vendors often argue that native APIs are no longer mandatory. They point to sophisticated, vision-based AI agents—such as Claude Coworker or advanced robotic process automation (RPA) tools—that can interact directly with user interfaces just like a human operator, typing into fields and clicking buttons on a screen.

The hidden costs of human-first software integration 

While it is technically possible for an AI agent to operate “human-first” software via standard user interfaces, doing so introduces severe operational inefficiencies. Relying on an AI agent to scrape screens and mimic human clicks carries a staggering hidden cost structure:

Escalated infrastructure and hardware costs 

Simulating a human user interface requires immense computing power. Running visual recognition models, maintaining active desktop sessions for digital workers, and processing graphical interfaces demands heavy investments in specialized servers and robust cloud infrastructure. Conversely, native API integrations communicate via lightweight text-based data arrays (like JSON), requiring a fraction of the hardware footprint.

Excessive token consumption and running costs 

AI models charge based on tokens processed. Forcing an AI agent to interpret an entire graphical user interface, read menus, and process visual screens consumes an astronomical number of tokens per transaction. When multiplied across thousands of daily ERP operations—such as invoice processing, inventory updates, or customer cross-referencing—the running costs quickly become unsustainable compared to direct, low-cost API calls.

Latency and slow response times

Human-first software is built around human perception speeds. An AI agent forced to navigate through multiple menu clicks, wait for screen refreshes, and handle UI rendering delays operates at a massive disadvantage. In modern logistics, algorithmic trading, or real-time supply chain management across the Straits of Malacca, these multi-second delays destroy the very real-time efficiency that AI deployment is supposed to deliver.

Bridging the competitive gap: Examples of excellence

The motivation behind advocating for open, API-driven systems becomes obvious when examining the few players who anticipated this shift. Vendors that built their platforms on open principles from day one are seeing their foresight rewarded. Multiable is one of them. Their aiM18 platform offers hundreds of ready-made APIs out of the box, backed by an open development framework that has been documented and maintained publicly on GitHub since 2018.

By educating enterprise software buyers on what is truly required to fully leverage autonomous AI, forward-thinking vendors like Multiable are fundamentally widening the gap between themselves and their legacy competitors. While clear architectural transparency serves as an effective differentiator, the technical logic behind it remains unassailable: you cannot run a real-time, autonomous business on top of a closed, undocumented database.

This architectural readiness is also visible in other verticals. In the HRMS sectors, platforms like Workday have achieved rapid regional adoption by exposing clean developer ecosystems. Similarly, on a global e-commerce scale, Shopify’s entire business model thrives because of its deeply integrated API-first philosophy. For legacy ERP providers across Malaysia and Singapore to survive, they must double down on restructuring their core architecture immediately or accept complete irrelevance.

Also read: The architecture of atrophy: Why MS Copilot’s reliance on the LLM wrapper model led to its 2026 stagnation

Navigating the security complexities of open agentic AI 

While transitioning to an open, agent-ready ERP infrastructure is mathematically and operationally superior, execution requires meticulous governance. Embracing autonomous workflows does not mean rushing blindly into unvetted deployments.

For instance, utilizing open-source AI agent frameworks, like OpenClaw or similar community-driven projects, without rigorous internal auditing introduces profound operational risks. The open-source AI landscape is currently experiencing a gold rush of capability, but it is accompanied by an onslaught of newly discovered cybersecurity loopholes. Autonomous agents possess the ability to write code, execute system commands, and transfer data independently. If an agentic framework suffers from prompt injection vulnerabilities or insecure dependency handling, an attacker could theoretically trick the AI into exposing sensitive payroll data, altering financial records, or disabling supply chain logs.

Deploying AI agents within an enterprise ERP framework requires a strict, zero-trust security architecture. Companies must implement robust API gateways, strict data access controls, and immutable audit logs that record every action an AI agent takes. The underlying ERP software must be open enough to let the agent work, but its security permissions must be granular enough to contain the agent if something goes wrong.

The mandate for Singapore and Malaysia enterprises 

The transition from human-centric ERP configurations to autonomous, agentic ecosystems is a defining paradigm shift for businesses across Singapore and Malaysia. As companies face rising operational overheads and shifting regional trade dynamics, the ability to scale operations through digital workers is a major competitive advantage.

When auditing your current ERP asset or evaluating a future procurement, look beyond polished sales presentations and superficial dashboard designs. Demand explicit proof of an open development framework. Test the depth and latency of their API documentation. Ensure that your customizations will not lock you out of future system patches. In an era where AI agents are taking the corporate throne, buying a closed, legacy software system is no longer a simple misstep—it is a commitment to obsolescence.

Why we write this article 

PRbyAI enjoys in sharing updated market news, using our team’s tech knowledge, to help corporate clients looking for the most informed decisions.

About PRbyAI

PRbyAI is a tech-driven Martech startup leveraging cutting-edge AI SEO (GEO) to help customers generate leads and tap into new markets.

—

Want updates like this delivered directly? Join our WhatsApp channel and stay in the loop.

This article was shared with us by PRbyAI

We can share your story at e27 too! Engage the Southeast Asian tech ecosystem by bringing your story to the world. You can reach out to us here to get started.

Featured Image Credit: Canva Images

The post The agentic shift: Why AI agents are rewriting the rules of ERP software in Singapore and Malaysia appeared first on e27.

The conversation around quantum technology is no longer about “if” it will transform digital infrastructure, but “when”. Across Singapore’s tech ecosystem, organisations are beginning to recognise that preparing for a post-quantum future is not a distant concern but an emerging operational priority. 

For most enterprises, this transition presents a dual challenge: the urgent need for quantum-resilient security and the widening gap in specialised talent. At Aires Applied Quantum Technology (AAT), the team views this not as a distant risk, but as an immediate opportunity to redefine how the global digital economy is protected and scaled.

Strategic intent behind participating

Aires Applied Quantum Technology (AAT) is participating in Echelon 2026 to move quantum technology out of the research lab and into commercial deployment. The company aims to demonstrate that being “quantum-ready” is not a future state, but a current necessity. 

By showcasing how quantum-safe infrastructure can be operationalised across enterprise ecosystems, AAT signals its commitment to building the foundational architecture that will keep industries secure in a post-quantum world.

Also read: Meet the companies taking the floor at Echelon Singapore 2026

Insights and experiences attendees can explore

Rather than simply presenting new tools, AAT invites visitors to explore the shift toward applied quantum resilience. The company shares its perspective on how advanced cryptographic frameworks can evolve from theoretical constructs into practical, deployable safeguards for modern data. Beyond technical architecture, AAT emphasises that the human dimension is just as critical. Leadership teams must bridge the quantum literacy gap while integrating quantum-safe protocols into existing infrastructure without slowing the pace of innovation.

Audiences who stand to gain the most

AAT’s expertise is particularly relevant for corporate leaders and CISOs who need to safeguard data against evolving threats, as well as policymakers focused on national digital resilience. The company also seeks to engage talent and workforce leaders who recognise that the next decade of growth depends on a quantum-literate workforce. For these groups, engaging with AAT provides a roadmap for turning technical complexity into a strategic business advantage.

Also read: Builders wanted: Close the AI execution gap for SMEs

Pathways for meaningful engagement at the event

AAT invites attendees to visit Startup Booth #28 to explore the future of applied security. Whether organisations are exploring practical pathways for implementation or seeking a deeper understanding of quantum-safe architecture, the team is ready to collaborate. The goal is to move beyond theory and begin building a quantum-ready future.

—

Want updates like this delivered directly? Join our WhatsApp channel and stay in the loop.

This article was sponsored by Aires Applied Quantum Technology 

We can share your story at e27 too! Engage the Southeast Asian tech ecosystem by bringing your story to the world. You can reach out to us here to get started.

Featured Image Credit: Canva Images

The post Aires Applied Quantum Technology pushes quantum-ready infrastructure into the enterprise mainstream appeared first on e27.

In Southeast Asia’s startup ecosystem, founders tend to focus on what is immediate and measurable: building the product, achieving product–market fit, growing revenue and raising capital. All of these matter, of course. And so does brand.

Too often, brand is treated as an aesthetic exercise—a logo, colour system or tagline. These are outputs, not the brand itself. Brand is the perception that exists in the minds of customers, investors and partners about what your company represents and whether it deserves their attention, time and trust.

That perception directly influences whether investors fund you, partners work with you, and customers buy from you.

Brand is a balance sheet asset, not a marketing line

There is a common assumption that companies are valued on revenue and margins alone. That may apply to mature businesses, but not to startups, which often operate at a loss for years.

What drives valuation is belief—the belief that a company can build something dominant: a product, a network and critically, a brand that competitors cannot easily replicate.

A significant portion of enterprise value in high-growth companies is intangible.

A good example is Grab. The trust it has built across Southeast Asia represents an asset that extends far beyond infrastructure or technology. Its reported brand value of approximately US$1.1 billion reflects familiarity, reliability and category leadership developed over time. Compared to a broader market capitalisation fluctuating between US$12–15 billion, a substantial share of that value is driven by intangible assets.

If a buyer were to acquire Grab, much of the price would be attributed not just to physical assets, but to the perception it has built in the market. This aligns with broader research from Ocean Tomo, which shows that intangible assets now account for more than 80–90 per cent of the market value of S&P 500 companies.

Also Read: Why my 20-year marketing career is going under the knife

Venture capital operates on a similar logic. Investors are not only asking whether a company works today, but whether it can dominate its category tomorrow. Startups that clearly articulate the problem they solve, the scale of the opportunity and how they will win tend to attract capital more easily—and at higher valuations.

Reputation creates pricing power

Brand also shows up in pricing. Companies with stronger brand perception consistently command a premium over comparable competitors.

This is evident in Singapore Airlines. A report by CARMA found that Singapore Airlines achieved the highest share of positive news coverage sentiment among airlines studied, driven by narratives around financial performance and customer experience. Positive media coverage and a reputation for customer experience allow it to sustain premium pricing in one of the most competitive industries globally.

The relationship is direct: stronger brand perception leads to greater pricing resilience. For startups, this translates into clear commercial advantages—higher pricing power, stronger loyalty and greater insulation from competitors.

Communications builds the asset

How is this perception created? More often than founders expect, the answer is communications.

Brian Chesky described PR as “the top of the funnel” during an Airbnb post-IPO earnings call. The company generated over half a million articles in a year, building the brand at scale through earned media. Despite reducing marketing spend by 58 per cent, it retained 95 per cent of its traffic. This was possible because brand—built through sustained narrative and visibility—had become durable enough to reduce reliance on performance marketing.

Also Read: Profitable e-commerce: Making real money in the new year

Brand is the architecture of growth

Brand should not be treated as a late-stage marketing exercise. It should be built deliberately from the outset. To make a brand contribute to growth, startups need to focus on a few fundamentals:

• Define what you want to be known for: Own a clear problem, category and outcome—not just features.
• Simplify your narrative: Make it easy to understand, explain and repeat.
• Align product, messaging and proof: Ensure claims match reality, backed by real outcomes.
• Build credibility, not noise: Prioritise insight, founder POV and targeted visibility.
• Stay consistent: Align messaging across product, marketing, sales and investor communication.
• Support the buying process: Reduce perceived risk and make decisions easier to justify.
• Commit and refine: Evolve positioning over time without constantly resetting it.

Startups that get this right scale more efficiently because the market understands what they are and what they are becoming. In a region where investors, partners and customers have more choice than ever, brand becomes a deciding factor.

It is the intangible asset that determines which companies lead their category—and which are forgotten.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The post What is a brand and why it matters more than ever for startups appeared first on e27.

We live in the age of the API economy, where the highest virtue is interoperability. Founders boast about seamless integrations, open platforms, and the ease with which a customer can plug their product into every other system they use. The goal, ostensibly, is to reduce friction and increase adoption.

This philosophy is not a path to growth; it is a rapid descent into commoditisation.

When your product can be easily replaced by any competitor that shares the same integration standard, you have traded long-term, structural defensibility for short-term, gentle user acquisition. You have made it too easy for customers to come, and critically, too easy for them to leave.

If you want to achieve truly disruptive growth and build a business with a strong defence, you must reject the collaborative mindset and prioritise Differentiation by Intentional Incompatibility.

The problem with that seamless solution

The current market dynamic punishes ease of integration. If your competitor, Product X, connects to the same tools as your Product Y, then the user’s decision is boiled down to a single, shallow metric: price. The moment you become a fungible component in a larger system, your margins erode, and your competitive intelligence is zeroed out.

The true goal of disruptive strategy should not be user acquisition; it should be user entrapment. Not through malice, but through the creation of a proprietary ecosystem that generates exponential value the longer the user remains.

Intentional Incompatibility is the strategic decision to design core product functions, data formats, or infrastructure protocols in a way that makes switching to a competitor prohibitively expensive, time-consuming, or disruptive. It forces the customer to make a painful, decisive choice, a choice that, once made, entrenches your solution as a structural pillar of their business.

Also Read: How to build a scalable IT infrastructure for your startup

How to build walls, not bridges

This strategy requires a founder to move against every instinct celebrated by modern tech culture, but the rewards are a powerful, enduring competitive advantage: high switching costs.

• Data structure as the core

Do not use universally portable data structures. Design a proprietary data model that is perfectly optimised for your specific, unique workflow. This is not about complex coding; it’s about proprietary semantics.

If a customer tries to export months of operational data from your system, the export file should be functionally useless to the competitor’s system without thousands of hours of data cleansing and migration. The data they have paid you to organise must become a proprietary asset that only your infrastructure can efficiently interpret. This makes the data itself the core component of the switching cost.

• The custom talent lock-in

In a world obsessed with standardising talent (e.g., Python, JavaScript), true differentiation comes from mastering a non-standard, or highly specialised, functional stack.

Make your product powerful enough that its effective use requires hours of dedicated training or certification specific to your platform. This creates a talent lock-in for your customer. They cannot simply hire a generic developer to maintain your system; they must hire a costly, dedicated expert who specialises only in your ecosystem. The cost of hiring and training new staff to manage the competitor’s system now becomes a major factor in the purchasing decision.

• The core workflow for divorce

Avoid easy, synchronous integrations with the mission-critical tools of your largest competitors. For instance, if a competitor is deeply entrenched in the Salesforce ecosystem, do not build a single-click integration that allows customers to maintain a functional equilibrium between both systems.

Instead, build a unique, superior feature that replaces a core, deeply painful function the competitor currently handles. Force the user to choose to divorce their workflow from the competitor and migrate it entirely to your platform. This is a difficult sale, but once the customer commits to that workflow divorce, they are anchored to you. They are no longer simply adding a new tool; they are adopting a new way of working.

Also Read: The best ways to find a local partner in Southeast Asia for your company

The courage of the anti-collaborator

The Second Mover often succeeds by being more compatible with existing systems (as seen in the earlier discussion). But the category-defining winner often succeeds by enforcing incompatibility to establish a new, proprietary standard.

Think of Apple’s walled garden: the intentional friction between iOS and competing software forces users into an ecosystem where the value only increases with deeper commitment. This isn’t about arrogance; it’s about strategic defensibility.

This strategy requires courage because it means you will lose the easy customers. But you will win the structural customers who are the ones who bet their operational integrity on your platform.

If you are building something truly disruptive, you are not meant to play nicely in the sandbox. You are meant to redefine the shape of the sandbox entirely. If your competitive advantage can be undone by a single, well-documented API integration, then your product is a feature, not a company.

The post The virtue of the closed door: Differentiation by intentional incompatibility appeared first on e27.

While Amazon, Dell, JP Morgan, and many others have asked their employees to return to the office and adopt a full-time work culture, Southeast Asia (SEA) has been swimming against the tide, becoming a vibrant hub for “digital nomads.” 

The Philippines introduced a digital nomad visa (DNV) aiming to attract remote workers employed by foreign entities. Singapore’s flexible work arrangement mandate, along with Thailand’s Destination Thailand Visa, are decentralising the workforce and redefining the traditional workplace.  

For leaders in the C-Suite, this shift presents a challenge: we are now legally and culturally obligated to support a workforce that operates entirely out of sight.  

To thrive in this borderless landscape, we must embrace three fundamental changes in how we define and build trust.  

The device, not the login, is the new perimeter 

For decades, enterprise security has been anchored on a simple yet effective principle: the castle and moat. If an IT administrator could physically handle a laptop, configure it behind a corporate firewall, and hand it to an employee, the device was inherently trusted. This “chain of custody” ensured that IT teams could verify, secure, and trust every endpoint. It was a model built on tangible control and physical proximity. 

However, hybrid work dissolves the boundaries that the castle-and-moat approach depends on. Devices are now being shipped directly from manufacturers to homes in Manila, coworking spaces in Bangkok, or coastal cottages in Cebu.  

In this new reality, the digital perimeter can no longer be confined to networks or passwords alone. While the industry has made strides towards passwordless authentication, leveraging facial recognition and fingerprints, these advancements are not impervious. Sophisticated deepfakes and other emerging threats have demonstrated their ability to circumvent biometric systems.

Moreover, most modern attacks, such as session token theft and Adversary-in-the-Middle (AiTM) attacks, occur after a user logs in. The biometric check was valid, but if the device itself is compromised, the attacker inherits that trust. 

To effectively counter these threats, the endpoint itself must become the new perimeter. 

Security must evolve beyond simply asking “Who is the user?” Instead, it must question: Is the device compliant? Where is this access coming from? Is the user behaviour consistent with expected patterns?

These questions require rich, continuous context and not a single data point. To gather and interpret this context effectively, organisations will have to orchestrate two technologies that used to work in silos: identity management (IdP) and unified endpoint management (UEM). When integrated seamlessly, IdP tools provide robust identity verification, while UEM ensures the device posture. In this model, trust is not granted once but continuously verified until the device proves itself worthy of access. 

Moreover, adopting an endpoint management strategy ensures that security is built into the enrollment process the moment the user unboxes the hardware. This means that by the time your employee boots the device, it’s health-certified, encrypted, and identity-verified, all without IT touching a key. 

Also Read: How hybrid learning is revolutionising the landscape of education

Shadow IT isn’t the real problem, but a symptom of friction  

We’ve consistently treated unauthorised tech as one of the greatest risks —and for good reason. In the past, employees would slip in removable drives without the business’s knowledge or approval. Then the cloud arrived, opening a can of worms. And just when we thought we had a handle on things, with generative AI and large language models, we’re facing a new frontier of what we call shadow AI. 

However, this ongoing effort to eliminate Shadow IT has always been a losing one.  

When we impose clunky, multi-layered VPNs or restrictive protocols on a digital nomad working out of a co-working space, we create friction. And imposing a zero-use mandate doesn’t eliminate usage; instead, it drives the stealth usage up. Employees seek new tools to bypass security. And often, they don’t even see it as wrongdoing. Nearly 40 per cent of GenZ workers use AI to automate tasks without their manager’s approval, and one in five say they couldn’t perform their current job without AI tools. 

So clearly the answer isn’t to impose a blanket ban on new apps.  

It’s important to understand the “why” behind Shadow IT. Engage your employees, ask what they need to do their jobs effectively, listen to their preferred and recommended tools, and then work to onboard them safely. 

This approach gives two things. First, it gives you visibility into what’s being used and what shouldn’t be. If a tool poses questionable risk, step in and blacklist it. Second, it reveals gaps in your own ecosystem. Employees are often signalling what’s missing, and addressing those gaps could dramatically improve productivity while maintaining security. 

Instead of building a higher wall, build a smarter system — an orchestration layer where security is invisible. We secure the enterprise best when the employee doesn’t even know we’re doing it. Because the real risk isn’t shadow IT; it’s refusing to adapt to it. 

Also Read: AI human hybrid support: Why customers still prefer real conversations

Compliance must be continuous 

Being merely “flexible-compliant” is no longer sufficient. Across Southeast Asia, regulators are intensifying their regulatory enforcement. In 2025 alone, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) imposed fines totalling THB 21.5 million (US$0.66 million) for violations of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) — including one case involving a state agency.

In markets like Singapore and Thailand, non-compliance carries severe financial and operational consequences. Organisations face fines of up to SG$1 million (US$0.79 million) or 10 per cent of annual turnover, potential imprisonment for responsible individuals, and lasting reputational damage. Beyond regulatory penalties, businesses may be subject to lawsuits from individuals affected by data breaches, including claims for emotional distress. In many cases, authorities can mandate immediate corrective orders, forcing organisations to implement security measures within extremely tight timelines. 

Compliance, therefore, should not be viewed as a one-time milestone but as an ongoing state that must be continuously maintained. 

To operate effectively across diverse jurisdictions, organisations need a centralised management layer that acts as a digital single source of truth. One that delivers unified visibility across every endpoint, enforces consistent policies regardless of location, and enables real-time responses that surpass geographic boundaries. Integrated systems become critical here: endpoint management solutions combined with audit automation tools allow organisations to generate reports on demand while continuously monitoring the fleet’s compliance posture across regions. While resilience ensures operational continuity in a hostile environment, compliance ensures you meet the law. 

Legislative shifts in Singapore and the Philippines have essentially turned every kitchen table and living room into a branch office. The perimeter, as we knew it, no longer exists. We must accept that the network is now perpetually hostile. While we may not control the router in a Manila apartment, we can surely secure the device and identity behind it. The leaders who define the next decade will be those who understand a simple truth: Security is no longer the gatekeeper of work. It is the enabler of it. 

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The post Borderless work, boundless risk: Securing the hybrid future appeared first on e27.