Project #6 Policy Review and Recommendations Presentation Instructions This is the final phase of the case study assignments. The primary purpose of this project is for you to demonstrate your understanding of the principles covered in this course. You will create a minimum of 12 presentation slides to summarize the policy review conducted and your recommendations for the next steps the merged company should take to protect its data and information assets. (MS Power Point .pptx format is the preferred delivery format; if you do not have Power Point, you may print your presentation slides to PDF and deliver the assignment as a PDF document.) The title and reference slides are included in the required slide count. Your presentation must include a minimum of 5 references. Each policy review and recommendations presentation should address the following: Current policy: Discuss the current (as per the case study) IT cybersecurity policy. New technology: Describe the functionality of the new technology selected for implementation and the challenges associated with the current cybersecurity policy. Identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could be introduced by the new technology that might not be mitigated by technological configuration management. Recommendations: Discuss revisions and modifications that must be made to the current IT cybersecurity policy to ensure that the new technology does not compromise the organization’s cybersecurity posture. Address the inter- and intra-organization leadership, managerial, and policy challenges and effects associated with the recommendations. Additional Information Consult the grading rubric for specific content and formatting requirements for this assignment.Your presentation should be professional in appearance with consistent use of fonts, font sizes, margins, etc. Your presentation should use standard terms and definitions for cybersecurity. See Course Content > Cybersecurity Concepts Review for recommended resources.There is no APA formatting guidance for slide presentations.You must include a title slide with the assignment title, your name, and the due date. Your reference list must be on a separate slide at the end of your file. These slides do not count towards the assignment’s slide count.You are expected to write grammatically correct English in every assignment that you submit for grading. Do not turn in any work without (a) using spell check, (b) using grammar check, (c) verifying that your punctuation is correct and (d) reviewing your work for correct word usage and correctly structured sentences and paragraphs. You are expected to credit your sources using in-text citations and reference list entries. Both your citations and your reference list entries must follow a consistent citation style (APA, MLA, etc.).
Unformatted Attachment Preview
CSIA 485: Practical Applications in Cybersecurity Management & Policy
Project #6 Policy Review and Recommendations Presentation
This is the final phase of the case study assignments. The primary purpose of this project is for you to
demonstrate your understanding of the principles covered in this course. You will create a minimum of
12 presentation slides to summarize the policy review conducted and your recommendations for the
next steps the merged company should take to protect its data and information assets. (MS Power Point
.pptx format is the preferred delivery format; if you do not have Power Point, you may print your
presentation slides to PDF and deliver the assignment as a PDF document.)
The title and reference slides are included in the required slide count.
Your presentation must include a minimum of 5 references.
Each policy review and recommendations presentation should address the following:
Current policy: Discuss the current (as per the case study) IT cybersecurity policy.
New technology: Describe the functionality of the new technology selected for implementation
and the challenges associated with the current cybersecurity policy. Identify cybersecurity
vulnerabilities that could be introduced by the new technology that might not be mitigated by
technological configuration management.
Recommendations: Discuss revisions and modifications that must be made to the current IT
cybersecurity policy to ensure that the new technology does not compromise the organization’s
cybersecurity posture. Address the inter- and intra-organization leadership, managerial, and
policy challenges and effects associated with the recommendations.
1. Consult the grading rubric for specific content and formatting requirements for this assignment.
2. Your presentation should be professional in appearance with consistent use of fonts, font sizes,
3. Your presentation should use standard terms and definitions for cybersecurity. See Course
Content > Cybersecurity Concepts Review for recommended resources.
4. There is no APA formatting guidance for slide presentations.
5. You must include a title slide with the assignment title, your name, and the due date. Your
reference list must be on a separate slide at the end of your file. These slides do not count
towards the assignment’s slide count.
6. You are expected to write grammatically correct English in every assignment that you submit for
grading. Do not turn in any work without (a) using spell check, (b) using grammar check, (c)
verifying that your punctuation is correct and (d) reviewing your work for correct word usage
and correctly structured sentences and paragraphs.
Copyright © 2018 by University of Maryland University College. All rights reserved.
CSIA 485: Practical Applications in Cybersecurity Management & Policy
7. You are expected to credit your sources using in-text citations and reference list entries. Both
your citations and your reference list entries must follow a consistent citation style (APA, MLA,
Copyright © 2018 by University of Maryland University College. All rights reserved.
Journal of Information Technology Education:
Innovations in Practice
Volume 11, 2012
Disaster at a University:
A Case Study in Information Security
Ramakrishna Ayyagari and Jonathan Tyks
University of Massachusetts-Boston, Boston, MA, USA
Security and disaster training is identified as a top Information Technology (IT) required skill that
needs to be taught in Information Systems (IS) curriculums. Accordingly, information security
and privacy have become core concepts in information system education. Providing IT security
on a shoestring budget is always difficult and many small universities are challenged with balancing cost and effectiveness. Many colleges and universities have additional security challenges,
such as relaxed working environments, less formalized policies and procedures, and employees
that “wear many hats.” Therefore, it is not surprising to note that majority of data breaches since
2005 occur in educational settings. So, it is imperative that this segment (i.e., educational settings) be represented in classroom discussions to prepare future employees.
To this end, we present a case that addresses a data breach at a university caused by lax security
policies and includes an element of social engineering. The data breach at the university resulted
in a number of students’ losing personally identifiable information. The resulting aftermath
placed a significant financial burden on the university as it was not prepared to handle an information security disaster. This case can be used as a pedagogical tool as it uniquely captured a data
breach in a university setting. Readers of the case will identify that at the management level the
case raised a number of issues regarding the security culture at the university and management of
security function. The case also highlights the issues of lack of training and access control.
Keywords: Information Security, Disaster Recovery, Data Breach.
Security and disaster training is identified as the top IT required skill that needs to be taught in IS
curriculums (Kim, Hsu, & Stern, 2006). Accordingly, information security and privacy have become core concepts in information system education (Hentea, Dhillon, & Dhillon, 2006; Kroenke, 2012; Laudon & Laudon, 2010). Instructors have several approaches to teach security and
privacy concepts. One can take a more traditional lecture based approach or a more hands-on approach that utilizes labs, case studies, etc. (Gregg, 2008). It is important to note that advances in
pedagogical research place emphasis on
Material published as part of this publication, either on-line or
hands-on or active learning. Imparting
in print, is copyrighted by the Informing Science Institute.
knowledge based solely on lectures is
Permission to make digital or paper copy of part or all of these
criticized as there is less opportunity for
works for personal or classroom use is granted without fee
students to be actively engaged (Bok,
provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit
or commercial advantage AND that copies 1) bear this notice
in full and 2) give the full citation on the first page. It is permissible to abstract these works so long as credit is given. To
copy in all other cases or to republish or to post on a server or
to redistribute to lists requires specific permission and payment
of a fee. Contact Publisher@InformingScience.org to request
Accordingly, active learning has gained
prominence among educators and researchers (Meyers & Jones, 1993). Students are eager and seek opportunities to
Editor: Uolevi Nikula
Information Security Disaster
apply their knowledge to simulate realistic situations (Auster & Wylie, 2006). Research shows
that students find learning achieved through active participation to be more meaningful and valuable (Mitchell, 2004; Pariseau & Kezim, 2007; Wingfield & Black, 2005). One of the ways in
which students can be engaged is through case studies (Bradford & Peck, 1997; Shapiro, 1984;
Pariseau & Kezim, 2007). Case studies provide the students a unique opportunity to assume the
roles of participants in the cases (Richards, Gorman, Scherer, & Landel, 1995). This provides an
opportunity for students to reflect on their learning and apply it to crystallize their thoughts and
arguments. Students are put into situations that can be ambiguous and force students to make decisions dealing with uncertainties (Richards et al., 1995). In fact, a recent study about learning
preferences indicates that students place high value for case studies (Goorha & Mohan, 2009).
Raising awareness regarding security issues faced by educational institutions is important because
the majority of reported breaches occur in educational settings. An analysis of all the data breaches from 2005 indicates that 21% of breaches occur in academic settings resulting in more than 8
million individual records being compromised (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2011). It should be
noted that the ‘education’ industry has the most number of breaches compared to any other industry category including medical, businesses, and government agencies (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2011). Further, fundamental differences exist between academic and business settings. It is
common practice in businesses to protect trade secrets, intellectual property, etc. However, educational settings are based on values of information sharing. As Qayoumi and Woody (2005, page
8) point out, “…the concept of information security runs counter to the open culture of information sharing – a deeply held value in academe.” Therefore, it is important to raise awareness about
the severity of security issues facing university settings. However, a brief review of published
cases in prominent outlets reveals that typical cases are geared towards business settings as presented below.
Literature Review of Security Case Studies
Most of the prominent security case studies focus on how businesses deal with data breaches or
privacy issues. For example, McNulty (2007) discusses the impact of a data breach on customers
in a retail electronics setting. The case deals with issues of the best way to communicate the
breach with customers and, overall, forces the participants to consider disaster response strategy
before a disaster occurs. Similarly, Haggerty and Chandrasekhar (2008) highlight the events leading to and the fallout due to a data breach at TJX. These cases highlight the issues of enormous
amount of data that retailers generate and the onus on firms to protect the sensitive information.
Eisenmann’s (2009) case addresses the severity of growing dependence on technology in the
medical industry. The case setting is a hospital (medical industry) where the access to medical
records is denied, putting numerous lives at risk. As the hackers try to extort money, the case
raises ethical and legal questions and forces participants to make tough decisions.
Coutu (2007) raises ethical questions about the growing issue of lack of privacy in the networked
world. The case addresses whether the information found on Internet about a person can become
a burden in advancing the person’s careers. Ethical and privacy questions related to confidentiality of data and data reuse in business settings are also raised (Davenport & Harris, 2007; Fusaro,
2004; Schenberger & Mark, 2001). Davenport and Harris (2007) present a case that deals with the
issue of data reuse. It is a common practice for businesses to share customer data with the businesses’ affiliates. The case in question asks at what stage is the sharing of information detrimental
to customers? In a similar vein, Fusaro’s (2004) case asks at what stage do the data collected for
customization cross the boundary and become invasion of privacy? DoubleClick’s profiling issues and breach of privacy are also well known (Schenberger & Mark, 2001). Complaints filed
with the Federal Trade Commission had a severe impact on the shares of DoubleClick and led to
the development of privacy policies (Schenberger & Mark, 2001).
Ayyagari & Tyks
As this review points out, security case studies generally focus on business settings even though
educational institutions experience a fair share of security incidents. We address this gap by first
presenting a case study of a security breach at a university. We conclude by providing discussion
points and the lessons learned from this case study.
Disaster at a University – A Case Study
Turn Key University (TKU) is a medium sized public university located in Idaho. The institution
is situated on a beautiful 25 acre campus, just north of a major city. The University consists of
over 6,000 students mostly from the surrounding region. The institution is a liberal arts college
that offers over 30 undergraduate majors and a dozen graduate degrees. The school has a reputation for producing quality graduates for the surrounding community. The University is a major
employer in the area, providing jobs for over 900 employees.
The institution was organized as a typical university bureaucracy, with the President’s office
overseeing the Academic Affairs, Administrative Support Services, Human Resources, Finance,
and Information Technology divisions as shown in Figure 1. The IT, Finance, and Administrative
Support divisions are the primary focus of this case.
Figure 1: TKU’s Organizational Hierarchy
As shown in Figure 2, the Information Technology division consisted of six departments — Institutional Projects, Media Services, Teaching Support, Computing Systems, Web Services, and
Network & Telecom. Each of these departments was managed by a Director who reported to the
Chief Information Officer (CIO). The Information Technology Division managed all aspects of
computing on the University campus. The IT division employed over 70 permanent members and
several temporary/student employees. The IT division required a large server farm to manage a
transaction management system and other systems. TKU centralized all server functions in the
Computing Systems department.
Information Security Disaster
Figure 2: IT Division Hierarchy
Administrative Support Services supported the ancillary services offered by the college. Among
other things, this division managed relationships between the on-campus and off-campus vendors.
On-campus vendors include the post office, GoodFood (the student meal plan provider), CollegeBooks (the bookstore operator), and FastSnack (the snack machine provider). The snack machines were an important part of students’ life as many students relied on late night RedBull®
runs to make it through a last minute cram session. Off-campus vendors include restaurants, tanning parlors, and gas stations. Compared to the IT division, Administrative Support Services was
relatively small, with approximately one-fifth the numbers of personnel in the IT division.
The Finance Division was responsible for managing and reporting the financial state of the University. The division was made up of five departments: Financial Affairs, the Budget Office, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, and Student Services. All financial information reporting
was overseen by the Financial Affairs department. Overall, the Finance division employed 30
permanent employees and several part-time members on a need basis.
Since 2000, TKU used a transaction management system for student meal plans. There were three
different meal plan tiers: a lower volume plan that was aimed towards commuters, a middle volume plan that was targeted for full time students who leave on the weekends, and a high volume
plan that was designed for students who eat all meals on campus. Out of the three plans, the middle volume plan was the most popular among students and responsible for the majority share of
In addition to the meal plans, the transaction management system handled virtual dollars. Virtual
dollars can be thought of as a prepaid credit card. At the beginning of the semester students were
given a balance based on their meal plan, and students drew down the balance by purchasing
items from vendors. Students and parents were also able to add additional funds on the card
through an online portal. Students paid for items using virtual dollars at a variety of vendors –
they spent it on books from the bookstore, stamps from the post office, drinks from the snack ma-
Ayyagari & Tyks
chines, and on food from neighborhood restaurants. Virtual dollars were a hit with students as
they enjoyed having the freedom and convenience to pick what they wanted, when they wanted.
The transaction management system was more than a way for students to purchase food; it was
also a profit center for the college. From a fiscal perspective, the system was able to generate annual profits of $600,000 for TKU. Most of the revenues were from commissions on sales to vendors. Due to corporate cultural issues (as discussed below), the control of the system spanned
across the IT, Administrative Support Services, and Finance divisions, although none of the divisions received commissions. All the money generated from the system went into a central fund
managed by the President’s Office.
History of the System: Reflection of Corporate Culture
The Transaction Management System (TMS) had been in place for over ten years at the writing
of this case and within that time frame it had changed hands multiple times. Initially the system
was handled by the Computing Systems department in the Information Technology Division. The
typical system administrator learned about the system on-the-job in an informal fashion, and there
was a lack of process or steps that could be reproduced when system administrators changed. Further, when the system was implemented, security was an afterthought and security responsibilities
played a minor role in system administrators’ job duties. As a result, the current state of the system was that (1) there was a lack of formal process in managing the system and (2) the system
was never secured. At the time of writing, the system was managed by two administrators – Gary
and Tom from the Computing Systems department. They had been in their roles for a little over a
Although the TMS system depended on multiple divisions (IT, Finance, etc.,) for effective operation, the incentives in place were conducive to reinforcing the functional boundaries among various divisions (see Figure 1), thus resulting in friction among divisions. As the TMS grew in stature, the logical solution to reduce the political tensions among divisions was to split the system
responsibilities among the divisions. In this arrangement, IT continued to manage the servers with
Gary as the primary administrator and Tom as the backup. The Finance division took over the
administration and user access portion of the system. The responsibilities for system administrator fell on Don who had some technical background and was seen as a ‘tech geek’ in the Finance
division. At the time of this case study, Don had been in the system administrator role for three
months. When Don inherited the system, he received no formal system administration or security
training and found that there were no formal policies or business rules in place. As he learned the
system, he realized it housed a large amount of personally identifiable information (PII). There
were student social security numbers (which acted as a students’ primary ID in the university system), addresses, phone numbers, birthdates and meal plan information.
The Security Structure: Technical Safeguards
The security structure was handled in two different ways. The first was by ensuring only authorized people had access to the system. The second was by viewing events in the log files. The system was set up in a typical hierarchical structure, comparable to Windows Active Directory.
There were user accounts that branched into user groups. People could access the system by logging in with a username and password, similar to how a person would access their home computer. When a user needed an account, the system administrator would assign a username and
password. Once a user had a username, the system administrator placed the user in the appropriate user group, which determined what functions the user could perform. The administrator gro …
Purchase answer to see full