Cyber Threat Incident Handling Procedure for South African Schools.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increase of networks and electronic tools, the online antisocial behaviours have increased and cyber threats have consequently became prevalent world-wide. The new technologies are challenging current networking practices, and this has given rise to cyber threats in South African schools. Learners are not aware of what they should do when threatened online. There is a lack of procedures that can be consistently followed by South African schools, governing boards and educators. As a result, many learners remain vulnerable to the negative effects of these threats. A lack of fixed reporting procedures when dealing with incidents of cyber threats in South African schools, the potential legal obligations and the lack of research in this area has prompted this research. This paper proposes a cyber threat incident handling procedure for South African schools, based on already existing cyber safety guidelines for schools in other countries like Australia and Canada. The proposed procedure will contribute to these existing guidelines by determining and implementing characteristics specific for South African schools.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it