There are multiple ways to bring threats and vulnerabilities to light. Common practices and lessons learned can help us explore for known or common threats.
Instructions
Write a 3 page paper in which you:
Explain the differences in threat, vulnerability, and exploit assessments for information systems and define at least two tools or methods to perform each type.
Describe at least two tools or methods used to implement both physical and logical security controls (four in total), then identify the type of security personnel that would be used to implement each and discuss their roles and responsibilities.
Describe three considerations when translating a risk assessment into a risk mitigation plan, then discuss the differences between a risk mitigation plan and a contingency plan.
Explain the two primary goals to achieve when implementing a risk mitigation plan and discuss the methods of mitigation for common information system risks.
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Unveiling the Shadows: Threat, Vulnerability, and Exploit Assessments in Information Systems
The security of information systems is a paramount concern for organizations of all sizes. Proactive measures to identify and address potential weaknesses are crucial in a landscape of ever-evolving threats. Bringing these threats and vulnerabilities to light requires systematic assessments that delve into different aspects of the security posture. This paper will explore the distinctions between threat, vulnerability, and exploit assessments, detailing methods and tools for each. Furthermore, it will describe tools and personnel involved in implementing physical and logical security controls, discuss considerations in translating risk assessments into mitigation plans, differentiate mitigation and contingency plans, and finally, explain the primary goals and methods of risk mitigation for common information system risks.
Threat assessments focus on identifying potential adverse events or attacks that could harm an organization’s information systems and assets. The goal is to understand the who (threat actors), the what (potential attacks), the why (motivations), and the how (attack vectors). Threat assessments are often broad in scope, considering both internal and external threats, including malicious actors, accidental actions, and natural disasters.
One common method for threat assessment is threat modeling. This structured approach involves identifying potential threats, categorizing them based on their likelihood and impact, and analyzing the attack paths that could be exploited. Frameworks like STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) provide a systematic way to categorize threats based on potential security violations. Another valuable tool is the utilization of threat intelligence feeds. These are services and databases that provide up-to-date information on known threat actors, their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), and emerging threats. By leveraging this intelligence, organizations can proactively anticipate and prepare for potential attacks relevant to their industry and environment.
Vulnerability assessments, on the other hand, focus on identifying weaknesses or flaws within an organization’s information systems, infrastructure, and processes that could be exploited by a threat. These assessments aim to pinpoint the where the weaknesses lie.
A widely used tool for vulnerability assessment is vulnerability scanning software. These tools automatically scan networks, systems, and applications for known security weaknesses based on databases of Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs). Examples include Nessus, OpenVAS, and Qualys. These scanners provide reports detailing identified vulnerabilities, their severity levels, and potential remediation steps. Another crucial method is penetration testing (pen testing). This is a more active and in-depth assessment where security professionals simulate real-world attacks to identify exploitable vulnerabilities that might be missed by automated scanners. Pen testing can uncover complex weaknesses in system configurations and application logic.
Unveiling the Shadows: Threat, Vulnerability, and Exploit Assessments in Information Systems
The security of information systems is a paramount concern for organizations of all sizes. Proactive measures to identify and address potential weaknesses are crucial in a landscape of ever-evolving threats. Bringing these threats and vulnerabilities to light requires systematic assessments that delve into different aspects of the security posture. This paper will explore the distinctions between threat, vulnerability, and exploit assessments, detailing methods and tools for each. Furthermore, it will describe tools and personnel involved in implementing physical and logical security controls, discuss considerations in translating risk assessments into mitigation plans, differentiate mitigation and contingency plans, and finally, explain the primary goals and methods of risk mitigation for common information system risks.
Threat assessments focus on identifying potential adverse events or attacks that could harm an organization’s information systems and assets. The goal is to understand the who (threat actors), the what (potential attacks), the why (motivations), and the how (attack vectors). Threat assessments are often broad in scope, considering both internal and external threats, including malicious actors, accidental actions, and natural disasters.
One common method for threat assessment is threat modeling. This structured approach involves identifying potential threats, categorizing them based on their likelihood and impact, and analyzing the attack paths that could be exploited. Frameworks like STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) provide a systematic way to categorize threats based on potential security violations. Another valuable tool is the utilization of threat intelligence feeds. These are services and databases that provide up-to-date information on known threat actors, their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), and emerging threats. By leveraging this intelligence, organizations can proactively anticipate and prepare for potential attacks relevant to their industry and environment.
Vulnerability assessments, on the other hand, focus on identifying weaknesses or flaws within an organization’s information systems, infrastructure, and processes that could be exploited by a threat. These assessments aim to pinpoint the where the weaknesses lie.
A widely used tool for vulnerability assessment is vulnerability scanning software. These tools automatically scan networks, systems, and applications for known security weaknesses based on databases of Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs). Examples include Nessus, OpenVAS, and Qualys. These scanners provide reports detailing identified vulnerabilities, their severity levels, and potential remediation steps. Another crucial method is penetration testing (pen testing). This is a more active and in-depth assessment where security professionals simulate real-world attacks to identify exploitable vulnerabilities that might be missed by automated scanners. Pen testing can uncover complex weaknesses in system configurations and application logic.
Exploit assessments go a step further than vulnerability assessments by attempting to actively leverage identified vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access or cause harm to the system. The purpose is to determine the how bad a vulnerability is in a real-world scenario.
One common tool used in exploit assessments is Metasploit Framework. This powerful open-source platform provides a vast collection of exploits, payloads, and auxiliary modules that can be used to test the exploitability of identified vulnerabilities. Security professionals use Metasploit in a controlled environment to understand the potential impact of a successful exploit. Another method involves manual exploitation. Skilled security analysts utilize their knowledge of system weaknesses and programming to craft custom exploits tailored to specific vulnerabilities. This often involves techniques like buffer overflows, SQL injection, and cross-site scripting to demonstrate the real-world impact of the flaw.
Implementing security controls requires both physical and logical measures, often overseen by specialized personnel. Physical security controls aim to protect the physical assets and environment of the information systems. One tool for implementing physical security is biometric access control systems. These systems, such as fingerprint scanners or facial recognition, restrict physical access to sensitive areas based on unique biological traits. The security personnel responsible for implementing and managing these systems often include physical security specialists or facilities management personnel with security training. Their roles involve installing the systems, managing user access rights, and ensuring the systems are functioning correctly. Another method is the use of surveillance systems (CCTV). These cameras monitor physical spaces, deterring unauthorized access and providing evidence in case of security incidents. Security guards or security operations center (SOC) analysts are typically responsible for monitoring these systems and responding to any suspicious activity. Their roles include real-time monitoring, reviewing footage, and initiating appropriate actions.
Logical security controls, on the other hand, protect the information itself and the systems that process it. One tool for implementing logical security is firewall software and hardware. Firewalls act as barriers between networks, controlling incoming and outgoing traffic based on predefined rules. Network security engineers are crucial for implementing and managing firewalls. Their responsibilities include configuring firewall rules, monitoring network traffic for malicious activity, and ensuring the firewall is properly integrated with other security systems. Another method is the implementation of multi-factor authentication (MFA). MFA requires users to provide two or more verification factors (e.g., password and a one-time code) before granting access. Identity and access management (IAM) specialists are typically involved in implementing and managing MFA. Their roles include configuring authentication policies, managing user identities, and ensuring secure access to resources.
Translating a risk assessment into a risk mitigation plan requires careful consideration of several factors. Firstly, prioritization based on risk severity is critical. The risk assessment will likely identify numerous risks, but not all will pose the same level of threat or have the same potential impact. The mitigation plan should focus on addressing the highest-priority risks first, often determined by a combination of likelihood and impact. Secondly, cost-benefit analysis is essential. Implementing security controls often involves financial investment. The mitigation plan should consider the cost of implementing each control against the potential losses associated with the risk it aims to address. It’s about finding a balance between security and practicality. Thirdly, organizational constraints and culture must be taken into account. The mitigation plan needs to be feasible within the organization’s budget, resources, and existing operational processes. It also needs to be aligned with the organization’s culture to ensure user adoption and compliance.
A risk mitigation plan outlines the specific actions an organization will take to reduce the likelihood or impact of identified risks. It details the chosen security controls, implementation timelines, responsible parties, and resource allocation. The goal is to proactively minimize potential harm. In contrast, a contingency plan focuses on the steps an organization will take after a security incident or disruption has occurred. It outlines procedures for recovery, business continuity, and minimizing the damage caused by the event. While the risk mitigation plan aims to prevent incidents, the contingency plan prepares the organization to respond effectively when prevention fails.
