Getting "Front and Center" on Security Policies: Leading Institutions Have Dusted Them off, Put Them Online, and Made Them the Blueprint of a New "Resiliency" Vision
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Any security expert worth his hefty price tag will you: the only truly protected bank is one adopting a layered approach. This means that all the operational elements of infrastructure-including network, web applications, databases, and servers-receive equal attention in lockdown and maintenance. Before an organization can get that far, though, it needs a security policy to clarify its thinking and set the budget and agenda. It's a simple idea but one that has not always been successfully adopted in the past. Happily all that seems to be changing. Rob Miller, vice-president of marketing with M-Tech, an infrastructure change management vendor based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, says that relatively recent developments (including this year's acts of nature, memories of semi-recent power outages or fading but still legendary acts of cyber hooligans) have only heightened the concern over the security issues which had become of great import in 2001. One positive ripple effect of almost biblical woes faced by the nation and elsewhere: Security policy is now front-and-center, either getting revised among best practitioners or adopted in finally useful ways among the rest. But it's not really over til the fat client sings, so to speak. Because banks are more distributed (and exposed), the once uncomplicated act of policy development is both harder to do (as a testable exercise) and more necessary given how complicated today's business environment actually is. Everybody has one, right? Policy's official story has always been this: the industry's heavily regulated nature has long made security policies existent and extant. (That is to say, everybody had good security policy because the regulators insisted on it.) Yet off the record comments still indicate that dusty paper on a shelf syndrome is still the norm, several years after the disturbing events of 9/11 might have dictated otherwise. Among the show and tell crowd, paper-based policy keeps them compliant, but doesn't let them achieve higher proficiencies. The dates on the material will change and so will some of the content, says Rob Dyson, associate partner of Accenture's security practice, Dallas. [Preparedness] really runs the gamut out there, says Dyson. top 50 institutions, he explains, the budgets, extensive staff, and huge base of supporting vendors are all guided by an industrial strength policy that is distributed on the intranet. Others in the vast middle market, struggle to give a less than ideal policy more than nominal play. Another source agreed that good policy still appeared in an uneven distribution in the financial services industry. Sometimes we see things that are pretty shocking, he said. What policy can do M-Tech customer Charlie Dixon, vice-president technology, with $6 billion assets Riggs Bank, Washington, D.C., says his bank, for one, has stepped up many facets of its policy since 2001, prior to the bank's much publicized Bank Secrecy Act troubles. has also made numerous tech purchases, including use of an incident tracking system and adoption of M-Tech's password management technology--decisions partially guided by needs that policy revealed. We take policy seriously here, Dixon explained. It is relevant, it is regularly updated, and it is referred to during application development, for Policy makes a difference in matters large and small. At Riggs, we just don't harden our servers, Dixon explains, referring to the process of placing a dedicated security device at the service and application layer. We secure the desktops so that instant messaging, say, or non-authorized use of e-mail doesn't put the organization at risk for information leaks. As Dixon alluded to in his comments above, a good security policy serves as one mechanism, along with the policies and practices of human resources, to control how business users behave when they use their laptops, desktops, and Blackberries, for instance. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle