( Report on Socio-Cultural and Political-Economic Factors in the Context of a Contemporary Cyber Threat CSE2HUM Assignment 2 ) This assignment is due at 10:00 on 10/09/20 and is worth 20% of your...

1 answer below »
i had attached the files


( Report on Socio-Cultural and Political-Economic Factors in the Context of a Contemporary Cyber Threat CSE2HUM Assignment 2 ) This assignment is due at 10:00 on 10/09/20 and is worth 20% of your overall mark for CSE2HUM Assignment Task: Background: Miro Popkhadze has warned that “the global pandemic will reshape international relationships, perceptions, ideas, and visions over the rules, structures, and organizing principles of the Post-COVID-19 world order” (2020). While speaking of the broader political context, he noted Russia’s hybrid attacks on the West during the pandemic stating that they included “disinformation, propaganda, [and] cyber- attacks [which] threaten the cohesion and legitimacy of the Western political establishments while making Russian narratives effective factors in shaping attitudes, public opinions, and false perceptions in Western societies” (2020). While Russia is seeking to tear down the current order, China is seeking to achieve a position of international leadership within it. Popkhadze warned that both Russia and China were seeking to advance their positions of international leadership as the US and international institutions failed to provide global leadership during the crisis. China is Australia’s largest trading partner, a significant investor in Australia, but also a strategic competitor for leadership in the region. Among Australia’s top exports are education, that is Chinese students studying in Australia. Tim Wilson MP, a member of the Intelligence Committee, has raised concerns about foreign influence at universities (Greene 2019). Others have raised concern about Australia’s reliance on foreign students to fund universities (Horne 2020). In cybersecurity studies, and particular in research degrees, exporting knowledge may be at odds with national security interests. On the other side there is an increasing desire to educate Australians and build a workforce that can be self- reliant when it comes to developing and manufacturing security related components and products. The task: Write a 1000-word report/short essay in formal prose that critically analyses the relationship(s) between social, cultural, political and economic factors as they relate/inform/interact with (individually and/or in concert) cybersecurity threats related to foreign students in Australian higher education. References Greene, A 2019, ‘Government MPs alarmed over Chinese influence at Australian universities after pro- Beijing rallies’, ABC News, 18 August, Horne J, 2020 ‘How universities came to rely on international students’, The Conversation, 22 May, Popkhadze, M 2020, ‘Will The United States Lead The Post-COVID World?’ Global Security Review, 16 June, viewed 11 August, . Your objective in this assessment: · Identify relevant cybersecurity threats TIPS You may consider: · Threats posed by students studying cybersecurity · The threat of students in other fields who may come to the university with cybersecurity skills · The threats from not having foreign students (and staff) · Any other threats related to cybersecurity and foreign students · Any other closely related issues (e.g. foreign staff, conferences etc.). Remember threats is plural, so you need to discuss at least 2 different threats. You also need to define what you mean by a cyberthreat – and make sure the threats you choose match your definition. · Identify factors (social, cultural, political and / or economic) which interact with each threat TIPS ‘individually and/or in concert’ means you may consider: · Multiple individual factors e.g.: social, cultural, political and / or economic · Combinations of factors e.g. sociocultural factors, sociopolitical factors, socioeconomic factors, political economy, etc. (research what these terms mean) · A combination of the above · Provide a sound and convincing analysis of some of the ways the factors you identified relate/inform/interact with the threat TIPS Consider things like: · i.e. do they increase/decrease the risk? · Do they change the perception [rather than reality] of the risk? · Do they create non cybersecurity related imperatives for action / inaction which may override cybersecurity considerations? · Etc. · Remember: Your task IS NOT to argue a position for or against foreign students studying cybersecurity in Australia. It is only to discuss the factors that influence this discussion. Additional Guidelines & Tips · Remember that you are being assessed on your mastery of the course content, so put your analysis of the socio-cultural and political-economic factors that are involved with contemporary cyber threats front and center. · Do not waste words on an inventory/detailed description of a cyber threat. Do not waste words on a standalone description of the capitalist treadmill of production and consumption. You need to demonstrate your ability to synthesize arguments from the multiple domains of knowledge you have covered in this course. · Concentrate primarily on demonstrating your understanding of, and ability to, critically analyze the theoretical/conceptual material covered in the preceding weeks’ readings, lectures and labs. Highest marks are always reserved for those who can go beyond description and critically synthesize course content. · You must also demonstrate your ability to critically analyze and articulate in your own words your own conceptualizations of the key concepts featured in the assignment prompt: critically define and explain the assignment’s keywords. · You need to prove arguments, not opinions. Arguments are supported by facts or logic, opinions are beliefs. · Be selective, be strategic, be concise. · The 10% rule in terms of word limit applies (10% under or 10% over the specified word limit will not attract a penalty to your marks). · Lecture slides may be used as a guide for finding suitable references for your assignment, but they should not be referenced in-lieu of the texts and scholarly work on which the slides are based (or at least relevant equivalents/alternatives to those texts). · Remember, practically all assignments, not just those in this subject but in general, are designed to assess your mastery of course content – show the assessor that you not only understand what has been covered in the course so far, but also that you can take it apart, explain how it works, put it back together again, and, most importantly, show us that you can apply what you have learnt from the course. References and reference list Your references will be cited inline, which means they count towards your word limit. Your reference list, which should appear at the end, does not count towards the word limit. A note on the rubric The attached rubric is provided to give you additional guidance on what the marker will look for when marking your assignment. You are encouraged to mark your own work using this rubric before finalizing your assignment. This will help you to notice areas where your assignment can be improved. Remember: Content which is not relevant to the assignment question will be ignored. You cannot meet the rubric requirements using content which is irrelevant to this assignment. Credit note: The image of a person in a hoodie on laptop with a green binary background used at the top of this assignment sheet is based on an image by Christoph Scholz released under a creative commons license, details at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/140988606@N08/27509199696 Marking Rubric: Assessed Material<50% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100% the key theoretical terms & concepts drawn from course content integrated into the essay’s arguments 35%: … are not named/used incorrectly/vaguely defined. …are named but not defined. … are named, defined, and incorporated into text. … are briefly defined, incorporated into the text, and used to support argument(s). … are concisely defined, critically analysed, and used to support argument(s). argument 35%: mostly descriptive. little analysis. rarely addresses the contention. not clearly related to essay question. descriptive. some analysis. exploration rather than argument. addresses contention in passing. some clear analysis. frequently addresses the contention mostly clear and critical analysis. always addresses the contention consistently clear and critical analysis. contention is sound and convincing. relevant reading and research 10%: non-academic or otherwise unreliable sources used/sources used are potentially misunderstood. insufficient incorporation of sources/over-reliance on one or two sources. cursory understanding of sources used is evident. sufficient incorporation of sources shows adequate understanding of sources. skillfully incorporated and critically analyzed sources. sources beyond required readings prominent. strong understanding of sources used is demonstrated. wide reading on the topic as well as a strong awareness of multiple perspectives through that reading evident. overall clarity and quality of writing 10%: difficult to read. poor quoting / grammar /spelling/vocab /punctuation/ paragraphing etc. relatively easy to read but more proofing needed / verbose clear expression / essay has been effectively edited well written. development of argument clearly outlined. sentences flow. succinct. well written. clear line of argument. engaging style. harvard in-text referencing and reference list 10%: http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/referencing- tool/ style rarely correct/ little referencing of ideas/ content that should have been referenced left unreferenced. some inconsistencies in referencing/ insufficient referencing of appropriate sources. errors present in referencing but referencing present is sufficient. few errors/ skillful referencing. consistent, precise and skillful referencing 50-59%="" 60-69%="" 70-79%="" 80-100%="" the="" key="" theoretical="" terms="" &="" concepts="" drawn="" from="" course="" content="" integrated="" into="" the="" essay’s="" arguments="" 35%:="" …="" are="" not="" named/used="" incorrectly/vaguely="" defined.="" …are="" named="" but="" not="" defined.="" …="" are="" named,="" defined,="" and="" incorporated="" into="" text.="" …="" are="" briefly="" defined,="" incorporated="" into="" the="" text,="" and="" used="" to="" support="" argument(s).="" …="" are="" concisely="" defined,="" critically="" analysed,="" and="" used="" to="" support="" argument(s).="" argument="" 35%:="" mostly="" descriptive.="" little="" analysis.="" rarely="" addresses="" the="" contention.="" not="" clearly="" related="" to="" essay="" question.="" descriptive.="" some="" analysis.="" exploration="" rather="" than="" argument.="" addresses="" contention="" in="" passing.="" some="" clear="" analysis.="" frequently="" addresses="" the="" contention="" mostly="" clear="" and="" critical="" analysis.="" always="" addresses="" the="" contention="" consistently="" clear="" and="" critical="" analysis.="" contention="" is="" sound="" and="" convincing.="" relevant="" reading="" and="" research="" 10%:="" non-academic="" or="" otherwise="" unreliable="" sources="" used/sources="" used="" are="" potentially="" misunderstood.="" insufficient="" incorporation="" of="" sources/over-reliance="" on="" one="" or="" two="" sources.="" cursory="" understanding="" of="" sources="" used="" is="" evident.="" sufficient="" incorporation="" of="" sources="" shows="" adequate="" understanding="" of="" sources.="" skillfully="" incorporated="" and="" critically="" analyzed="" sources.="" sources="" beyond="" required="" readings="" prominent.="" strong="" understanding="" of="" sources="" used="" is="" demonstrated.="" wide="" reading="" on="" the="" topic="" as="" well="" as="" a="" strong="" awareness="" of="" multiple="" perspectives="" through="" that="" reading="" evident.="" overall="" clarity="" and="" quality="" of="" writing="" 10%:="" difficult="" to="" read.="" poor="" quoting="" grammar="" spelling/vocab="" punctuation/="" paragraphing="" etc.="" relatively="" easy="" to="" read="" but="" more="" proofing="" needed="" verbose="" clear="" expression="" essay="" has="" been="" effectively="" edited="" well="" written.="" development="" of="" argument="" clearly="" outlined.="" sentences="" flow.="" succinct.="" well="" written.="" clear="" line="" of="" argument.="" engaging="" style.="" harvard="" in-text="" referencing="" and="" reference="" list="" 10%:="" http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/referencing-="" tool/="" style="" rarely="" correct/="" little="" referencing="" of="" ideas/="" content="" that="" should="" have="" been="" referenced="" left="" unreferenced.="" some="" inconsistencies="" in="" referencing/="" insufficient="" referencing="" of="" appropriate="" sources.="" errors="" present="" in="" referencing="" but="" referencing="" present="" is="" sufficient.="" few="" errors/="" skillful="" referencing.="" consistent,="" precise="" and="" skillful="">
Answered Same DaySep 01, 2021CSE2HUMLa Trobe University

Answer To: ( Report on Socio-Cultural and Political-Economic Factors in the Context of a Contemporary Cyber...

Deepti answered on Sep 09 2021
139 Votes
Critical Analysis
This report discusses the impact of various social, political, economic and cultural (SPEC) factors related to cybersecurity threats to foreign students who intend to take higher education in Australia. This is an attempt t
o critically analyze the relationship between those factors to gain a better understanding of the influence of exporting of knowledge on cyber security in Australia. Cyber space is a vast and complex system that recognizes how people interact with technology, with considerable high human involvement. The suspicious activities can be detected through various existing detection models. The major areas to exploit cyber security in Australia include addressing skill shortage, concentrating on research and development and thus enhance national cybersecurity with sophisticated and resilient security culture. As stated by Gandhi et.al., the social, political, economic and cultural factors can substantially predict the eruption of security breaches, belligerent attacks and abnormal activities in cyberspace.
The SPEC conflicts hold a prominent responsibility behind the growing cyberattacks. The social factors have led the country’s criminal intelligence to prioritize cybercrime threats to Australia and build better understanding of the nature of those threats. In response to that, the Australian Cyber Security Center (ACSC) came into existence in 2013 (Brangwin, 2020). The latest report by ACSC has highlighted the cybercrime threats that impact Australian economy (ACSC, 2020). The national cyber security bodies like National Cyber Security Committee (NCSC) support strategic response coordination among various governments during occurrence of national cyber incident. During previous one year including the period of COVID pandemic, cyberattacks involving ransomware have dominated the impact, followed by malicious emails, phishing and spearphishing leading to compromised system, data exposure, theft, data leak, DoS, etc. The Figure 1 below shows cyber incidents by month from Jul, 2019 to June 2020 with notable spike in April 2020. The pandemic period has witnessed increment in phishing campaigns themed on COVID-19. A secure design principles implementation is urgently required as certain influential attacks could be mitigated or avoided through good security practices.
Figure 1: Reference (ACSC, 2020)
Economic factor impacts the business and individuals...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here