The question is: which one is right for your business?

Head-to-Head SSE vs. SASE

The key differences between SSE and SASE primarily revolve around their scope and focus within the IT security and network architecture landscape.

Target Audience

• SSE is particularly appealing to organizations that prioritize security over networking or have specific security needs that can be addressed without modifying their network architecture.
• SASE is aimed at organizations seeking a unified approach to managing both their network and security needs, especially those with complex, distributed environments.

Design Philosophy

• SSE is designed with a security-first approach, prioritizing cloud-centric security services to protect users and data regardless of location. It is particularly focused on securing access to the web, cloud services, and private applications.
• SASE is designed to provide both secure and optimized network access, addressing the needs of modern enterprises with distributed workforces and cloud-based resources. It aims to simplify and consolidate network and security infrastructure.

Scope and Focus

• SSE is a subset of SASE that focuses exclusively on security services. It integrates various security functions, such as cloud access security broker (CASB), firewall as a service (FWaaS), secure web gateway (SWG), zero-trust network access (ZTNA), and other security functions into a unified platform.
• SASE combines both networking and security services in a single, cloud-delivered service model. It includes the same security functions as SSE but also incorporates networking capabilities like SD-WAN, WAN optimization, and quality of service (QoS).

Connectivity

• SSE does not include SD-WAN or other networking functions, focusing instead on security aspects. It is ideal for organizations that either do not require advanced networking capabilities or have already invested in SD-WAN separately.
• SASE includes SD-WAN and other networking functions as part of its offering, providing a comprehensive solution for both connectivity and security. This makes it suitable for organizations looking to consolidate their network and security infrastructure into a single platform.

Implementation Considerations

• SSE can be a strategic choice for organizations looking to enhance their security posture without overhauling their existing network infrastructure. It allows for a phased approach to adopting cloud-based security services.
• SASE represents a more holistic transformation, requiring organizations to integrate their networking and security strategies. It is well-suited for enterprises undergoing digital transformation and seeking to streamline their IT operations.

In summary, the choice between SSE and SASE depends on an organization’s specific needs. SSE offers a focused, security-centric solution, while SASE provides a comprehensive, integrated approach to both networking and security.

Pros and Cons of SSE and SASE

While cloud-based security solutions like SSE and SASE have been gaining traction as organizations move toward more cloud-centric, flexible, and remote-friendly IT environments, each has pros and cons.

Pros of SSE and SASE

Enhanced Security

• SSE provides a unified platform for various security services like SWG, CASB, ZTNA, and FWaaS, which can improve an organization’s security posture by offering consistent protection across all users and data, regardless of location.
• SASE combines networking and security into a single cloud service, which can lead to better security outcomes due to integrated traffic inspection and security policy implementation.

Scalability and Flexibility

• Both SSE and SASE offer scalable security solutions that can adapt to changing business needs and accommodate growth without the need for significant infrastructure investment.

Simplified Management

• SSE simplifies the management of security services by consolidating them into a single platform, reducing complexity and operational expenses.
• SASE reduces the complexity of managing separate networking and security products by bringing them under one umbrella.

Improved Performance

• SSE can improve user experience by providing faster and more efficient connectivity to web, cloud, and private applications.
• SASE often leads to better network performance due to its built-in private backbone and optimization features.

Cost Savings

• Both SSE and SASE can lead to cost savings by minimizing the need for multiple security and networking products and reducing the overhead associated with maintaining traditional hardware.

Cons of SSE and SASE

Security Risks

• SSE may not account for the unique needs of application security for SaaS versus infrastructure as a service (IaaS), potentially leaving some attack surfaces unprotected.
• SASE adoption may involve trade-offs between security and usability, potentially increasing the attack surface if security policies are relaxed.

Performance Issues

• Some SSE solutions may introduce latency if they require backhauling data to a centralized point.
• SASE may have performance issues if not properly configured or if the network is not tuned to work with cloud-native technologies.

Implementation Challenges

• SSE can be complex to implement, especially for organizations with established centralized network security models.
• SASE may involve significant changes to traditional infrastructure, which can disrupt productivity and collaboration during the transition.

Data Privacy and Compliance

• SSE must ensure data privacy and compliance with country and regional industry regulations, which can be challenging for some providers.
• SASE may introduce new challenges in compliance and data management due to the distribution of corporate data across external connections and cloud providers.

Dependency on Cloud Providers

• Both SSE and SASE increase dependency on cloud providers, which can affect control over data and systems.

Vendor Lock-In

• SSE could further confuse some who initially believe it is something separate from SASE, leading to potential vendor lock-in.
• With SASE, there’s a risk of single provider lock-in, which may not be suitable for businesses requiring advanced IT security functionality.

While both SSE and SASE offer numerous benefits, they also present numerous challenges. Organizations must carefully weigh these factors to determine whether SSE or SASE aligns with their specific needs and strategic goals.

Key Considerations When Choosing Between SSE and SASE

When choosing between SSE and SASE, organizations must consider a variety of factors that align with their specific requirements, existing network infrastructure, and strategic objectives.

Organizational Security Needs

• SSE is ideal for organizations prioritizing security services embedded within their network architecture, especially those in sectors like finance, government, and healthcare, where stringent security is paramount.
• SASE is suitable for organizations seeking an all-encompassing solution that integrates networking and security services. It provides secure access across various locations and devices, tailored for a remote workforce.

Security vs. Network Priorities

• If security is the top priority, SSE provides a comprehensive set of security services for cloud applications and services.
• If network performance and scalability need to be improved, SASE may be the better option.

Support for Remote Workers and Branch Offices

• SSE is often integrated with on-premises infrastructure and may be better suited for organizations looking to strengthen network security at the edge.
• SASE is often a cloud-native solution with global points of presence, making it ideal for enterprises seeking to simplify network architecture, especially for remote users and branch offices.

Cloud-Native Solution vs. Network Infrastructure Security

• SSE is deployed near data origin and emphasizes strong load balancing and content caching with firewalls or intrusion prevention systems.
• SASE enables secure, anywhere access to cloud applications, integrating various network and security functions for a streamlined approach.

Existing Network Infrastructure

• Organizations with complex or legacy network infrastructures may find SASE a better choice, as it can provide a more gradual path to migration.
• For cloud-native organizations or those with simpler network needs, SSE may be more appropriate.

Vendor Architecture and SLAs

• Ensure the chosen SSE vendor has strong service-level agreements (SLAs) and a track record of inspecting inline traffic for large global enterprises.
• For SASE, a single-vendor approach can simplify management and enhance performance by optimizing the flow of traffic between users, applications, and the cloud.

Flexibility and Scalability

• SSE should be flexible and scalable to address enterprise needs without sacrificing function, stability, and protection.
• SASE should be adaptable to dynamic business needs and offer a roadmap that aligns with IT initiatives and business goals.

Budget Considerations

• SASE solutions are typically more expensive up front but can offer significant cost savings in the long run by eliminating the need for multiple security appliances and tools.
• SSE might be a more cost-effective option for organizations that do not require the full suite of networking services included in SASE.

Transition Path to SASE

• SSE can serve as a stepping stone in the transition from traditional on-premises security to cloud-based security architecture, providing a clear path to SASE when the organization is ready.

Consultation with Experts

• It is advisable to consult with network security experts to assess needs and requirements before recommending the best solution for the organization.

Next Steps

In summary, the choice between SSE and SASE depends on an organization’s specific needs. While SSE offers a focused, security-centric solution, SASE provides a comprehensive, integrated approach to both networking and security.

Take the time to make a thorough assessment of your organization’s needs before deciding which route to take. Once that’s done, you can create a vendor shortlist using our GigaOm Key Criteria and Radar reports for SSE and/or SASE.

These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating SSE Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for SSE
• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating SASE Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for SASE

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post SSE vs. SASE: Which One is Right for Your Business? appeared first on Gigaom.

At its core, SSE converges multiple cloud-delivered security services, including cloud access security broker (CASB), firewall as a service (FWaaS), secure web gateway (SWG), and zero-trust network access (ZTNA) into a unified, cloud-based platform that ensures secure access to the web, cloud services, and private applications. By shifting security closer to users and devices, SSE enhances protection, reduces latency, and ensures secure access to cloud-based resources.

Furthermore, the importance of SSE stems from its ability to adapt security measures to where workloads, devices, and users are at any point in time, enhancing protection and ensuring secure access to resources regardless of location in today’s remote work and cloud-centric landscape—where traditional perimeter-based security models fall short. Moreover, by addressing the basic security concerns associated with cloud transition, digital business enablement, and remote work, SSE is evolving as an essential element for constructing cloud and networking security that can accelerate digital transformation by securing enterprise cloud services, private applications, and software as a service (SaaS).

As the SSE market evolves, we expect to see significant growth driven by demand for more agile, scalable, and integrated security solutions that can support the dynamic needs of businesses. Key trends shaping the future of SSE include the integration of advanced AI/ML technologies for better threat detection, the emphasis on zero-trust principles, and the need for solutions that offer seamless integration with existing IT infrastructures. In preparation, organizations must understand the SSE vendor landscape, evaluate integration capabilities, and adopt phased implementation strategies to ensure a smooth transition to these more advanced security models.

This is our first year evaluating the SSE space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This GigaOm Radar report evaluates 16 of the top SSE solutions and compares offerings against the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) outlined in the companion Key Criteria report. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading SSE offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

The post GigaOm Radar for Security Service Edge (SSE) appeared first on Gigaom.

However, a trending misconception in the realm of networking is the notion that all NOSs are essentially the same, offering similar features, performance, and capabilities. This myth stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the diverse requirements of different network types and the specialized functionalities that various NOSs are designed to provide.

In this blog, we’ll explore why this perception is flawed.

Diverse Network Requirements

Networks vary significantly in scale, complexity, and purpose. As a result, the choice of a NOS depends on various factors, including the network architecture (peer-to-peer versus client-server), the scale of the network, and specific requirements such as security, resource management, and user administration.

For example, a data center network, designed to manage high volumes of traffic and ensure reliable data storage and access, has vastly different requirements from a small office network, which may prioritize ease of use and minimal setup. Similarly, core networks, which form the backbone of the internet, demand high performance and robustness, in contrast with edge networks that require low latency and are often tailored for specific IoT applications.

Moreover, different NOSs offer varying levels of customization and scalability, catering to organizations’ specific needs. For example, some use cases, such as peering, require a NOS to support the full internet routing table (also known as the full border gateway protocol, or BGP, table) of over 1 million entries—including rapidly relearning the table and rerouting traffic in the event of a link or node failure—to ensure comprehensive connectivity and optimal routing decisions across the global internet based on various metrics such as the shortest path, least number of autonomous system (AS) hops, or other policy-based decisions. This can lead to improved performance and lower latency for end users but isn’t essential for a data center network with only a few segments.

Another factor is the need for the NOS to support different services based on the use case. Fixed edge networks must be able to support multiple services, such as quality of service (QoS) for maintaining the performance of latency-sensitive applications such as VoIP, video conferencing, and streaming services, internet protocol television (IPTV) for multicast streaming of high-quality video content with minimal latency, and carrier-grade network address translation (CGNAT) for ISPs to optimize existing IPv4 infrastructure and delay the investment required for IPv6 deployment. While QoS and IPTV need to be carried through to the aggregation network, CGNAT only needs to be done once at the edge, affecting the choice of NOS for each use case.

Features and Optimizations Vary by Type of Network

To meet these varied requirements, each NOS is developed with specific features and optimizations. For example, a NOS designed for data center operations might focus on virtualization capabilities and high-speed data processing, while a NOS for edge computing would prioritize low-latency data processing and lightweight deployment.

Data Center Networks

• Function: Data center networks are designed to house and provide connectivity for servers and storage systems that host applications and data.
• NOS features: NOSs for data centers are optimized for high-density server environments, virtualization, and storage networking. They often include features for data center bridging, overlay networks, and support for software-defined networking (SDN).

Core Networks

• Function: Core networks serve as the high-capacity backbone for data transmission across different regions or between different network layers.
• NOS features: Core network NOSs are designed for high throughput and reliability, with advanced routing protocols, high-speed packet forwarding, and support for large-scale network topologies.

Aggregation Networks

• Function: Aggregation networks collect traffic from access networks before it is sent to the core network, managing traffic from multiple sources.
• NOS features: NOSs for aggregation networks typically include capabilities for traffic management, QoS, and support for medium to high data throughput.

Peering Networks

• Function: Peering networks facilitate the exchange of traffic between different ISPs or large networks, often to reduce transit costs and improve performance.
• NOS features: NOSs in peering networks often have features for BGP routing, traffic filtering, and security controls to manage the exchange of routes and data with other networks.

Access Networks

• Function: Access networks connect end-user devices to the network, serving as the entry point for users to access network services.
• NOS features: Access network NOSs are designed for managing a large number of end-user connections, providing features like DHCP, DNS, and user authentication.

Fixed-Edge Networks

• Function: Fixed-edge networks are designed to deliver content and services with minimal latency by being closer to the end users.
• NOS features: Fixed-edge network NOSs may include features for local data processing, IoT support, and integration with edge computing platforms optimized for low latency.

Mobile-Edge Networks

• Function: Mobile-edge networks are part of the mobile telecommunications infrastructure, designed to bring computing resources closer to mobile users and devices.
• NOS features: Mobile-edge NOSs are optimized for the mobile environment, supporting features like mobile backhaul, real-time analytics, and seamless integration with mobile network functions.

Cloud Networks

• Function: Cloud networks provide scalable and flexible networking capabilities for cloud services, supporting a wide range of applications and services.
• NOS features: Cloud network NOSs are built for virtualized environments, offering features that support multitenancy, cloud orchestration, and dynamic resource allocation.

Tailored NOS Features

Since each type of network has distinct requirements and challenges, the NOS deployed must be specifically tailored to meet those needs. For example, a data center NOS must handle the high-density and virtualization demands of modern data centers, while a core network NOS focuses on high-speed, reliable data transport. Aggregation and peering network NOSs manage traffic flows and routing exchanges, respectively. Access network NOSs ensure connectivity for end users, and edge network NOSs (both fixed and mobile) are optimized for delivering services with low latency. Cloud network NOSs are designed to operate in virtualized cloud environments, providing the flexibility and scalability required for cloud services.

Security needs and compliance requirements can also dictate the choice of NOS. Certain environments may require specialized security features or compliance with specific standards, influencing the selection of a NOS that can adequately meet these demands. In addition, open source NOSs allow users to modify and adapt the software to unique requirements, which is particularly beneficial for specialized or evolving network environments.

Choosing the Right NOS for Your Business

The misbelief that all NOS are created equal overlooks the nuanced and diverse landscape of network technologies and requirements. Understanding the specific features, capabilities, and optimizations of different NOSs is crucial for selecting the right system to support an organization’s unique network infrastructure and objectives.

GigaOm has just released the 2024 NOS Radar reports across three market segments—mobile network operators and network service providers (MNOs and NSPs), communication service providers and managed service providers (CSPs and MSPs), and large enterprises and small-to-medium businesses (SMBs)—based on technical features and business criteria tailored to each market segment. While many of the solutions appear on each Radar, choosing the right NOS for the network is not as simple as picking one of the Leaders or Challengers. Just because one NOS is positioned as a Leader doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s right for you. Even adjacent NOSs may focus on entirely different networks.

By debunking the myth that all NOSs are created equal, organizations can make informed decisions that enhance their network’s performance, security, and efficiency.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s NOS Key Criteria and Radar reports. These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Network Operating Systems
• GigaOm Radar for Network Operating Systems: MNOs and NSPs
• GigaOm Radar for Network Operating Systems: CSPs and MSPs
• GigaOm Radar for Network Operating Systems: Large Enterprises and SMBs

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post Debunking Myths: All Network Operating Systems are NOT Created Equal appeared first on Gigaom.

However, it’s not without its challenges.

NetDevOps, Automation, and Orchestration—What’s What?

NetDevOps, network automation, and network orchestration are interconnected concepts within the realm of modern network management, each playing a distinct role in how networks are designed, operated, and maintained. While network automation deals with automating individual network tasks, network orchestration coordinates these automated tasks across the entire network for more efficient management. NetDevOps, on the other hand, is a broader approach that incorporates both automation and orchestration principles, along with DevOps practices, to enhance network agility, efficiency, and collaboration between network and development teams.

Challenges to NetDevOps Success

Networking teams face several challenges when implementing NetDevOps, which can hinder the transition from traditional network management practices to more agile and automated operations. These challenges include:

1. Automation and tool integration: Automating network operations and integrating various tools into a cohesive NetDevOps pipeline can be complex. Teams often struggle with selecting the right tools, standardizing data formats, and creating seamless workflows that span across different network domains and technologies.
2. Tool limitations and scalability: Relying on a limited set of tools or niche solutions can restrict the growth and scalability of NetDevOps initiatives. Scaling network infrastructure with paid models can also become prohibitively expensive.
3. Unstandardized data: Without standardized data, creating effective automation and NetDevOps processes is challenging. Teams may face issues with redundant data sets, lack of trust in network data, and difficulties in managing the complexities of a network with multiple moving parts.
4. Integration with existing processes: Integrating NetDevOps practices with existing network management and IT processes can be challenging. Organizations must ensure that new workflows and automation strategies align with their current operational models and business objectives.
5. Lack of expertise: Implementing a NetDevOps approach requires expertise in both networking and software development. Network engineers who traditionally focused on hardware and CLI-based configurations must now acquire new skills in software development, automation tools, and APIs. This transition can be challenging due to the steep learning curve and the need to balance ongoing network operations with professional development.
6. Cultural and organizational changes: The shift to NetDevOps requires significant cultural changes within organizations. Teams must move away from siloed operations to a more collaborative approach that integrates network operations with software development practices. This cultural shift can be difficult to achieve and requires buy-in from all levels of the organization.
7. Resistance to change: Network operations personnel may resist the shift to NetDevOps due to fear of the unknown, potential job displacement, or concerns about the reliability of automated processes. Overcoming this resistance is crucial for successful implementation.

Out of all of these challenges, the last one, resistance to change, is the most critical because the success of NetDevOps hinges not just on the adoption of new technologies and processes but, more importantly, on the willingness of individuals and teams to embrace these changes.

10 Steps for Overcoming Resistance and Creating Resilience

Overcoming cultural resistance to NetDevOps involves a multifaceted approach that addresses the concerns and habits of teams accustomed to traditional network management practices. Here are some strategies to facilitate this transition:

1. Management buy-in and leadership support: Secure support from top leadership to drive the cultural shift. Leaders should actively promote the adoption of NetDevOps practices and allocate resources for training and implementation.
2. Clear and consistent communication: Explain the benefits of NetDevOps, including how it can improve network reliability, security, and efficiency. Highlight success stories and case studies to illustrate its positive impact.
3. Highlight the role of network engineers in NetDevOps: Emphasize the crucial role that network engineers play in the NetDevOps ecosystem, transitioning from manual configurations to coding and automation, thereby elevating their strategic importance.
4. Training and professional development: Invest in training programs to upskill network engineers, software developers, and operations teams in DevOps principles, tools, and processes. Encourage certifications and continuous learning to build confidence in the new approach.
5. Promote collaboration across teams: Foster a culture of collaboration by organizing cross-functional teams and encouraging open communication. Use tools and platforms that facilitate collaboration and visibility across network and development teams.
6. Embrace automation gradually: Introduce automation in stages, beginning with repetitive and low-risk tasks. As teams become more comfortable with automation, expand its use to more complex network operations.
7. Pilot projects and phased implementation: Start with small, manageable pilot projects that allow teams to experience the NetDevOps process and see tangible benefits. Gradually expand the scope as confidence and competence grow.
8. Create a feedback loop: Implement a feedback mechanism where team members can share their experiences, concerns, and suggestions regarding the NetDevOps transition. Use this feedback to adjust strategies and address specific challenges.
9. Celebrate successes and recognize contributions: Acknowledge and reward teams and individuals who successfully adopt NetDevOps practices. Celebrating small wins can motivate others and reinforce the value of the new approach.
10. Foster a culture of continuous improvement: Encourage experimentation, learn from failures, and continuously seek ways to improve network operations and collaboration. This cultural shift is essential for the sustained success of NetDevOps.

By addressing cultural resistance through these 10 steps, organizations can successfully transition to a NetDevOps model, creating a more agile, efficient, and resilient network aligned with business goals.

The Bottom Line

NetDevOps is an essential approach for organizations seeking to manage network infrastructure and configurations more efficiently and effectively. By adopting NetDevOps principles and best practices, you can automate and scale network operations, improve collaboration between network and development teams, and ensure network changes are aligned with application requirements and business goals.

Take the first step toward planning your NetDevOps project today! Assess your current state, set clear goals, and develop a roadmap for implementation. Evaluate tools that align with your objectives and integrate well with your existing environment, including open-source options to avoid vendor lock-in. With the right preparation, collaboration, and tools, your organization can successfully adopt NetDevOps and reap the benefits of a more agile and resilient network infrastructure.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s NetDevOps Key Criteria and Radar reports. These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating NetDevOps Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for NetDevOps

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post From Resistance to Resilience: A Strategic Approach to NetDevOps Integration appeared first on Gigaom.

SSE provides consistent and comprehensive security coverage for an organization’s distributed IT assets and hybrid workforce. As more applications, data, and users shift to the cloud, traditional network security models focused on the data center perimeter become ineffective. SSE addresses the challenge by moving security controls closer to the user and workload, providing identity-based secure access regardless of location. Furthermore, a unified management console for policy administration, orchestration, and monitoring of security services across the entire digital landscape offers stronger security, greater scalability, and easier management in a more efficient operational package and cost model than traditional on-premises security.

Driven by the need to improve security, cut costs, and simplify management, organizations find that some of the main drivers propelling SSE adoption specifically include digital transformation initiatives, cloud migration, remote work, and an increasingly hostile threat landscape. Moreover, the adoption of SSE solutions is accelerating as enterprises gravitate toward modern, unified platforms and away from siloed point solutions, enabling the retirement of complex legacy security stacks in favor of an integrated cloud platform offering an enhanced end-user experience with consistent security, reduced latency, and increased flexibility.

SSE represents a significant shift in the way organizations approach security, moving away from traditional perimeter-based models with on-premises security appliances to a more integrated, cloud-centric approach. Moreover, as the digital landscape evolves, so too will the capabilities and applications of SSE. Already, we’re seeing the introduction of extended SSE for securing workloads, B2B interactions, and internet of things (IoT)/operational technology (OT) devices—not just users. As cloud adoption continues, SSE will alleviate the role of traditional security architectures backhauling traffic through the data center, providing a more efficient approach to managing digital ecosystem exposures.

Business Imperative
Deploying an SSE solution offers several compelling benefits. First, it provides a unified, cloud-centric platform that enables organizations to enforce consistent security policies, monitor user activities, and mitigate threats across their entire ecosystem, reducing risk and enhancing the security of remote workers. Second, SSE solutions offer improved performance and lower latency, which can significantly enhance the user experience, especially for mobile and remote workers, eliminating the need for slow virtual private networks (VPNs) and ensuring fast, seamless access to applications in public and private clouds. Lastly, by consolidating key security services, SSE can reduce operational complexities and costs, making it a cost-effective solution for modern organizations.

Sector Adoption Score
To help executives and decision-makers assess the potential impact and value of an SSE solution deployment to the business, this GigaOm Key Criteria report provides a structured assessment of the sector across five factors: benefit, maturity, urgency, impact, and effort. By scoring each factor based on how strongly it compels or deters adoption of an SSE solution, we provide an overall Sector Adoption Score (Figure 1) of 4.4 out of 5, with 5 indicating the strongest possible recommendation to adopt. This indicates that an SSE solution is a credible candidate for deployment and worthy of thoughtful consideration.

The factors contributing to the Sector Adoption Score for SSE are explained in more detail in the Sector Brief section that follows.