MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403346518 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.05560

Cyber Threats to Canadian Federal Election: Emerging Threats, Assessment, and Mitigation Strategies

2024· preprint· en· W4403346518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nazmul Islam, Soomin Kim, Mohammad Pirooz, Sasha Shvetsov

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyber threatsFederal electionComputer securityBusinessInternet privacyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canada prepares for the 2025 federal election, ensuring the integrity and security of the electoral process against cyber threats is crucial. Recent foreign interference in elections globally highlight the increasing sophistication of adversaries in exploiting technical and human vulnerabilities. Such vulnerabilities also exist in Canada's electoral system that relies on a complex network of IT systems, vendors, and personnel. To mitigate these vulnerabilities, a threat assessment is crucial to identify emerging threats, develop incident response capabilities, and build public trust and resilience against cyber threats. Therefore, this paper presents a comprehensive national cyber threat assessment, following the NIST Special Publication 800-30 framework, focusing on identifying and mitigating cybersecurity risks to the upcoming 2025 Canadian federal election. The research identifies three major threats: misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation (MDM) campaigns; attacks on critical infrastructure and election support systems; and espionage by malicious actors. Through detailed analysis, the assessment offers insights into the capabilities, intent, and potential impact of these threats. The paper also discusses emerging technologies and their influence on election security and proposes a multi-faceted approach to risk mitigation ahead of the election.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207