匿名使用者
匿名使用者 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 9 年前

20點) 幫我看一下 我的英文翻譯 有無翻錯

我紅色的部分,是完全看不懂,亂翻的,所以麻煩幫忙翻一下

其它的部分,如果有錯,也請幫忙修正後,到回答上 我20點會馬上奉上

感謝了

另外 我的知識檔案裡面,還有其它英文翻譯的問題,也是20點http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/my/my_question?show=...

也可以幫忙翻一下 感謝囉

Reflecting on the security concernsexpressed by companies contemplating moving to the cloud, Green, fromTrustmarque Solutions (a UK software solutions provider based in York), asks:信託勞斯萊斯解決方案(軟件解決方案提供商英國總部設在紐約),問道: “. . .howmany of those companies can truly say they have an internal data policy that ismore rigorous than that of a third party? And is duly enforced. How many ofthose companies strictly govern their staff’s training to ensure theyunderstand security policies and their importance and the consequences whenthey fail?” (Green, 2010).有多少人能夠真正說,他們公司有一個內部數據更嚴格的政策,比第三者?並正式實施。有多少人公司嚴格管理其員工的培訓,確保他們了解安全政策,其重要性和帶來的後果時,他們會失敗?“(綠,2010年)。 The aforementioned views on cloud versusin-house security are shared by Field, director of ParsecSystems (a London-based IT solutions provider), who says:director of Parsec System回答到: “There is a tendency to assume data is saferin-house because we have control. However, large cloud providers can generallyfund more significant security measures. They do that because they hold agoldmine of digital information and will be attacked regularly and assiduouslyby well-funded cyber-criminals. This has to be factored into the cost/benefitanalysis. Unemotional thinking will be necessary when comparing in-housesecurity to that of an external provider” (Field, 2010).有一種傾向,因為我們有控制權,所以是假設這些資料是比「in-house」還要安全的,然後,規模大的雲端供應商可以比一般的公司還要有更安全的保安措施,因為總是有一群有錢的網路hacker,會不斷的攻擊他們,使他們擁有充足的資訊安全訊息,這些也必須列入成本效益分析,不計較任何感情來比較的話,外部的雲端服務商,還是會比「in-house」還要來的安全許多

已更新項目:

另外 我的知識檔案裡面,還有其它英文翻譯的問題,也是20點http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/my/my_question?show=...

也可以幫忙翻一下 感謝囉

4 個解答

評分
  • 小船
    Lv 5
    9 年前
    最佳解答

    “. . .how many of those companies can truly say they have an internal data policy that is more rigorous than that of a third party? And is duly enforced. How many of those companies strictly govern their staff’s training to ensure they understand security policies and their importance and the consequences when they fail?” (Green, 2010).有多少公司能夠真正說,他們有比第三方更嚴格的內部資料政策?並充分地強制執行。有多少公司能嚴格管理員工的培訓,確保他們了解安全政策,重要性和後果,尤其當他們衰退時?“(格林 (姓氏),2010年)。

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
  • 9 年前

    Reflecting on the security concerns expressed by companies contemplating moving to the cloud, Green, fromTrustmarque Solutions (a UK software solutions provider based in York), asks:針對考慮保密安全性而想從Trustmarque Solutions 搬到the cloud, Green的那些公司 (總部設在約克的英國提供軟件問題解決方案公司),提出的問題:

    ( York是英國約克)

    “. . .howmany of those companies can truly say they have an internal data policy that ismore rigorous than that of a third party? And is duly enforced. How many ofthose companies strictly govern their staff’s training to ensure theyunderstand security policies and their importance and the consequences whenthey fail?” (Green, 2010).(參考 並修了小船的) 有多少公司能夠真格的說,他們有比第三方更嚴格的內部資料政策?並充分地強制執行。有多少公司能嚴格管理員工的培訓, 以確保員工了解資料保密政策及其重要性, 和當資料保密政策失敗時的? “(格林 (姓氏),2010年)。

    The aforementioned views on cloud versusin-house security are shared by Field, director of ParsecSystems (a London-based IT solutions provider), who says:前述的cloud versusin-house 安全保密政策在業界間被分享使用, 以倫敦為總部的IT問題解決方案公司Parsec System主管/署長/局長/處長/主任/ 董事/經理, 說到:

    (director 可翻譯為主管/署長/局長/處長/主任/董事/經理“There is a tendency to assume data is safer in-house because we have control. However, large cloud providers can generally fund more significant security measures. They do that because they hold agoldmine of digital information and will be attacked regularly and assiduouslyby well-funded cyber-criminals. This has to be factored into the cost/benefitanalysis. Unemotional thinking will be necessary when comparing in-housesecurity to that of an external provider” (Field, 2010).因為我們有控制權,所以我們傾向假設這些資料是比內部(in-house)的資料還安全。然而, 大規模的雲端供應商可以資助有更顯著功能的安全保密措施,因為他們掌握數位資料的金庫並且會經常性的被有一群得到大量金援的網路駭客罪犯攻擊。這些也必須被列入成本效益分析。當比較內部和由外部提供的資料安全保密時, 不帶感情來思考是必須的 。

    (in house 定義見http://www.google.com/search?hl=zh-TW&q=define%3A+... 我選翻"內部")

    2010-12-14 13:06:26 補充:

    "針對考慮保密安全性而想從Trustmarque Solutions 搬到the cloud, Green的那些公司...."

    用"移"或"轉移"可能更好 考慮文章的內容 似乎可以更改為

    "針對考慮資料保密安全性而想從Trustmarque Solutions 轉移到the cloud, Green的那些公司...."

    2010-12-15 23:23:08 補充:

    第一段應是 (之前沒打好 sorry)

    Reflecting on the security concerns expressed by companies contemplating moving to the cloud, Green, fromTrustmarque Solutions (a UK software solutions provider based in York), asks:

    針對考慮保密安全性而想從總部設在約克的英國軟件問題解決方案公司Trustmarque Solutions 搬到Green雲端供應商的那些公司 , 提出的問題

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
  • 9 年前

    how many of those companies can truly say they have an internal data policy that is more rigorous than that of a third party? And is duly enforced. How many of those companies strictly govern their staff’s training to ensure they understand security policies and their importance and the consequences when they fail?” (Green, 2010).有多少公司可以真的說他們有一個比第三方更縝密的內部政策?而且還可以適當實行。而這些公司又有多少可以嚴格管理員工的訓練,確定他們可以了解防護政策、自身的重要性以及他們失敗時會產生的後果?“(格林,2010年)。

    參考資料: 自己
    • 登入以對解答發表意見
  • 貓咪
    Lv 5
    9 年前

    “。 。 。howmany這些公司能夠真正地說,他們有一個內部數據的政策,ismore較嚴格的第三方?並正式實施。有多少ofthose公司嚴格管理其員工的培訓,以確保 theyunderstand安全政策及其重要性和後果 whenthey失敗?“(綠,2010年)。

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。