SmartKargo customers enjoy sharing experiences with the community. Watch below for key benefits and user experiences with SmartKargo.
SpiceJet: As one of India's most innovative carriers, SpiceJet was the first carrier in it's market to provide Door-2-Door service. SmartKargo's cloud-based air cargo management solution has provided SpiceJet with the flexibility to quickly expand its customer-facing capabilities, as well as increase the scope of services for its customers. Using SmartKargo's cutting-edge solution provides SpiceJet with an integrated system of modules that work in concert to meet the needs of all members of the cargo chain, from shipper to recipient.
Hawaiian Airlines: One of the U.S. best and most reliable airlines, linking the islands of Hawai’i, the U.S. mainland, and expanding across the Pacific with a fleet of Airbus A330s, Boeing 767s, and Boeing 717s. Because the state is a collection of islands separated by expanses too wide to bridge, Hawaiian Airlines is essentially a “highway,” serving a pivotal role in delivering a wide array of goods across Hawai’i; and its expanding Pacific network means they fly a growing volume of essential imports and well-known Hawaiian exports. Hawaiian launched SmartKargo in late June 2015, and it is already delivering a host of benefits.
Norwegian Cargo: Since 2013, Norwegian Cargo has been powered by SmartKargo, growing and expanding their cargo business with a fast-bookings mechanism and better capacity utilization. More recently, Smartkargo facilitated Norwegian Cargo's transition to the U.S. CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Onsite training and system deployment was conducted in only one week--with no delays during implementation. Norwegian is Scandinavia's 2nd largest airline, one of Europe's fastest growing, and a true innovator in the business. With a fleet of more than 100 737s and 787s, Norwegian files all over the Nordic countries, across Europe, and to destinations in the U.S. and Asia.
Volaris SOC Certification:The purpose of engagement was to examine description of controls related to QuantumID Technologies Inc. client service activities and related general computer controls and other internal controls related to information and system of the client organization , at its location at : India, Philippines and Boston U.S.
The reference for the examination and audit services were conducted as per AT - 801 standards issued by the AICPA under SSAE 16.
The Services covered were as follows :
⦁ Software Application Development Services
⦁ Application Support Services
⦁ Application Hosting and related Services
The engagement was conducted in two phases :
⦁ First Phase : Pre-Audit Phase where the existing processes, policies, IT governance procedures and client service and support processes will be tested for ascertaining suitability, adequacy and design of the controls as per SSAE16 prescribed criteria.
⦁ Second Phase : Type II Audit : Would involve testing of the controls and compliance with reference to System Description, Control Objectives and evaluation of the operating effectiveness over the selected period.
The scope of work included were as mentioned below -
⦁ Internal Controls effecting Financial Reporting by the Customer Users
⦁ Manage Third Party Services
⦁ Problem and Incidence Management
⦁ Change Management
⦁ IT General controls
⦁ Manage SDLC Operations
⦁ Manage Data and Quality
⦁ Manage HR and Organization Policies
Finally the Service Auditor’s Opinion:
In our opinion, in all material respects, based on the description criteria identified in QuantumID Technologies Inc. assertion and the applicable trust service criteria:
a. The description fairly presents the system that was designed and implemented throughout the period September 1, 2016 to November 30, 2016.
b. The controls related to the control objectives stated in the description were suitably designed to provide reasonable assurance that the control objectives would be achieved if the controls operated effectively throughout the period September 1, 2016, to November 30, 2016.
c. The controls tested, which were those necessary to provide reasonable assurance that the control objectives stated in the description were achieved, operated effectively throughout the period September 1, 2016, to November 30, 2016.