PFA
Why this assessment? Enable to identify and apply appropriate security measures to provide an enhanced level of security The feedback from this assessment will help students to be ready to correct any conceptual misunderstanding and apply in the next assessment Assessment Overview: The purpose of this assessment is to assess the students’ critical and analytical ability to delve into complex concepts about network security through reflection and collaboration. Due date 5 oct 2021 Weighting 30% Length and/or format 2000 Assessment type Individual Learning outcomes assessed LO1, LO2 Graduate attributes assessed GA2, GA4, GA5 How to submit Via LEO Assessment criteria Rubric: see Appendix III Context The context of this assignment is that you have been employed as a security specialist in an organisation. As part of your job, you need to critically analyse security vulnerabilities and threats in a networked information system. To do this, you have to apply your knowledge and skills to identify potential security threats, existing solutions, loopholes in the existing solutions and propose effective solutions to prevent security attacks. Instructions In this assignment, you have to write a research report on an advanced topic of information systems security. The following is a list of potential topics (but not limited to) – the topic needs to be narrowed down to address a more specific research question: · Kerberos, · PGP, VPNs · SSL, SET, IPSec · Smart cards · Steganography · IDS, Firewall · Biometric encryption · Key exchange mechanism · Trust based systems · Web security · Mobile security · Database Security · Wireless security · Security issues in RFID · Cloud security · Consumer privacy You must use the IEEE conference paper template to write the report. The template can be downloaded from the unit LEO site. The report should not exceed 2000 words in total excluding bibliography and appendix. Penalty will be applied for using exceeding word limits as per EUO guidelines. The report must include all topics described in the report structure section. Structure Feed Forward Template: You must complete and submit this template as the first page of the follow-on assignment (assessment 3). The template can be found on page 5 (Appendix-I). Checklist: You need to submit the completed checklist as instructed on page 6 (Appendix-II). Abstract: An abstract (a short summary of the article) needs to convey a complete synopsis of the paper, but within a word tight limit. Writing an abstract includes brief introduction to the general topic of the work and then explanation of the exact research question, including the aims. It should then include a description of the methodology, results, and discussion. Introduction: In the Introduction, you are attempting to inform the reader about the rationale behind the work, justifying why your work is an essential component of research in the field. The introduction does not have a strict word limit, unlike the abstract, but it should be as concise as possible. It can be a tricky part of the paper to write, so many scientists and researchers prefer to write it last, ensuring that they miss no major points. The introduction gives an overall review of the paper but does address a few slightly different issues from the abstract. An introduction should emphasize on background, importance, limitations, and assumptions. 2 Related Works/Research Methods/Research Works: For this portion of your report, you should describe the methods used when performing the experiments. If you are proposing a new scheme/technique, you have to describe it with appropriate examples. You may subdivide your work into multiple sub-sections and then explain step by step in detail. In case of review paper, this section may include critical analysis of others’ papers i.e., related works. Results & Analysis: These should be a quick synopsis of the facts, figures and statistical tests used to arrive at your final results. It is far better to stick with including only tables and graphs that show clearly the results. Do not be tempted to insert large numbers of graphs and figures just for the sake of it; each figure and graph should be mentioned, referred to and discussed in the text. You must be extremely critical of yourself in this section; you will not get marked down for mistakes in experiment or for poor results, only for not recognizing them. For review reports, you may not have results. In that case, you may include a comparison among different approaches and describe the research findings. Recommendations: In this section, you need to recommend some countermeasures to defend against different security attacks. You should justify why these security mechanisms are appropriate to protect the system from malicious attacks. Further, you need to identify how available resources can efficiently be used to ensure social and environmental benefits. You may bring some key points learned in the data stewardship lecture and tightly couple them with supporting arguments. Conclusion: This is really just a more elaborate version of the abstract. In a few paragraphs you should summarize your findings and recommendations. Your abstract will do most of this for you but, as long as you do not get carried away, especially for longer reports, it can help the reader absorb your findings a little more. References: Please refer to the referencing section in page 4. Referencing All papers that are used in the report must be cited in the reference section. Your report should include at least 6 peer reviewed conference and/or journal papers. Please ensure that you reference properly and acknowledge all sources using the Harvard (AGPS) style (). Don’t use IEEE referencing style. Please ensure your assignment makes use of in-text citations and a reference list. Missing citations or references is equivalent to plagiarism. Criteria The full criteria are compiled in a rubric, which can be found on page 7 (Appendix-III). Assessment Task 2- Research Report (30%) Learning Outcomes Criteria Standards Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations NN (0-49) PA (50-64) CR (65-74) DI (75-84) HD (85-100) GA5 LO1, 2 Weight: 10 marks TL: 3 Learning Stage: D Research report demonstrating comprehensive knowledge on the selected topic in terms of security services, threats, vulnerabilities, and mitigation techniques Little understanding of network security issues and the chosen topic. Contents under-developed and not appropriately linked to materials covered in the unit. Minimal understanding of network security issues and the selected topic. Contents reasonably linked to materials covered in the unit. Reasonably good understanding of network security issues and the selected topic. Contents appropriately linked to materials covered in the unit. Good understanding of network security issues and the selected topic. Close link shown between contents and materials covered in the unit. Very good understanding of network security issues and the selected topic. Tight integration between contents and materials covered in the unit. GA4 LO1 Weight: 10 marks TL: 3 Learning Stage: D Research report illustrating good command of critical review, explanations and justifications of arguments Explanations and justifications of arguments and decisions unclear. Little attempt to evaluate the information/evidence in any critical way. Minimal evidence given to support arguments and decisions. Some of the key information/evidence scrutinized in some depth. Some evidence given to support arguments and decisions. Most of the key information/evidence scrutinized in some depth. Well-developed and argued evidence given to support decisions. Identified most factors/matters pertinent to the problem, or issue and recognized the significance of any inter-relationships. Well-developed and argued evidence given to support decisions. Identified all relevant factors/matters pertinent to the problem, or issue and recognized the significance of any inter-relationships. GA2 LO2 Weight: 5 marks TL: 3 Learning Stage: D Research report identifying social and environmental issues and addressing the issues through stewardship of resources Fail to identify key issues. Failed to provide any recommendations how to address them. Satisfactory identified key issues. Provided few recommendations to address the issues. Credibly identified key issues. Provided some good recommendations to address the issues. Distinctive identification of key issues. Provided excellent recommendations to address the issues. Highly distinctive identification of key issues. Provided excellent recommendations and justified their applicability in the report. Other Criteria Weight: 5 marks Following the template and reference style correctly; Discussion Forum (DF) participation Didn’t follow the template and reference style Didn’t participate in the DF. Partially followed the template and reference style Shows partial engagement with the DF (e.g., 2 posts) Mostly followed the template and reference style Fair engagement with the DF (e.g., 4 posts) Followed properly, minor errors noticed Good engagement with the DF (e.g., 6 posts) Followed properly without any mistakes very good engagement with the DF (e.g., 7 posts) Notes: GA – Graduate Attribute; LO – Learning outcome; TL – Taxonomy Level (see Bloom’s Taxonomy); Learning Stage – Introduced (I), Developed (D), Assured (A)