MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409990126 · doi:10.63471/jitmbh24003

Intelligence-driven Risk Management in Information Security Systems

2024· article· en· W4409990126 on OpenAlexaff
Md Imran Sarkar, Abdullah Sakib

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology Management and Business Horizons · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation security managementRisk managementSecurity managementInformation securityComputer scienceComputer securityBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Security information and event managementKnowledge managementCloud computing securityCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of making decisions in information security, when faced with unclear probabilities and unforeseen consequences of events in the constantly evolving cyber threat landscape, has gained significant importance. Cyber threat intelligence equips decision-makers with essential information and context to comprehend and predict future threats, hence minimizing ambiguity and enhancing the precision of risk assessments. Addressing uncertainty in decision-making demands the adoption of a new methodology led by threat intelligence (TI) and a risk analysis approach. This is a crucial aspect of evidence-based decision-making. Our proposed solution to this difficulty involves the implementation of a TI-based security assessment methodology and a decision-making strategy that takes into account both known unknowns and unknown unknowns. The proposed methodology seeks to improve decision-making quality by utilizing causal graphs, which provide an alternative to current methodologies that rely on attack trees, hence reducing uncertainty. In addition, we analyze strategies, methods, and protocols that are feasible, likely, and credible, enhancing our capacity to anticipate enemy actions. Our proposed approach offers practical counsel to information security leaders, enabling them to make well-informed decisions in uncertain circumstances. This paper presents a novel approach to tackling the problem of making decisions in uncertain situations in the field of information security. It introduces a methodology that can assist decision-makers in navigating the complexities of the ever-changing and dynamic world of cyber threats.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.010
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information Technology Management and Business HorizonsSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207