Dergiler / International Journal of Information Security Science / 2016 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1

Institutional Cybersecurity from Military Perspective

Sayfa
1–7
Yayın Tarihi
2016-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In this study, institutional cybersecurity from the military perspective is analysed in the light of possible challenges, organizational structure, the military decision making process MDMP and cybersecurity workforce.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In the time we are living in, the nonlinear increase, usage and reliability on information communication technologies ICT are going to move forward.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:In this digital environment, people, institutions and government take necessary precautions ranging from personal to strategic level and adapt themselves to live or operate in that new form of environment.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In this study, institutional cybersecurity from the military perspective is analysed in the light of possible challenges, organizational structure, the military decision making process MDMP and cybersecurity workforce.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Institutional Cybersecurity · military organizations · MDMP

Abstract

In the time we are living in, the nonlinear increase, usage and reliability on information communication technologies ICT are going to move forward. In this digital environment, people, institutions and government take necessary precautions ranging from personal to strategic level and adapt themselves to live or operate in that new form of environment. When we consider a country' cybersecurity efforts as a whole, it starts with individuals at the bottom, institutions, firms and military organizations at middle and government at the top. Ensuring a robust cybersecurity policy in a country, requires all levels individual, institution, government to be at the same standard. While the government level cybersecurity strategy documents generally present a comprehensive approach, the institutional level cybersecurity roadmaps, action plans are generally not present or overlooked. Being one of the main elements of a country, military organizations should be prepared to operate in this new form of operational environment that is full of malwares, advance persistent threats APT and cyber espionage software. In this study, institutional cybersecurity from the military perspective is analysed in the light of possible challenges, organizational structure, the military decision making process MDMP and cybersecurity workforce.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KARAMAN, M., ÇATALKAYA, H., AYBAR, C. (2016). Institutional Cybersecurity from Military Perspective. International Journal of Information Security Science, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1, 1–7. https://ajindex.com/articles/832827

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. I. Sisaneci, O. Akin, M. Karaman, and M. Saglam. “A Novel Concept for Cybersecurity: Institutional Cybersecurity”, Information Security and Cryptology, Turkey, Ankara, Sep. 20-21, 2013, pp. 89. Conference on H. Cintiriz, M. N. Buhur and E. Sensoy. “Military Implications of Big Data”, International Conference on Military İstanbul,
  2. War Colleges Command, March 10-11, 2015. ICMSS-2015,
  3. Turkey, J. Ferwerda, N. Choucri and S. Madnick. “Institutional Foundations for Cyber Security: Current Responses and New Challenges” A. Klimburg, Ed., National Cyber Security Framework Manual. NATO CCD COE Publications, 2012. B. Adelmann, “Cispa is Big Brother’s Friend,” 2012. S. Alexander, “Rise of Outsourcing Poses New Cybersecurity Problems,” 2011. B. Gourley, “Open Source Software and Cyber Defense,” 2009. “Security Task Force: Public-Private Information Sharing,” 2012.
  4. L. Ablon, M.C. Libicki and A.A. Golay, Markets for Cybercrime Tools and Stolen Data, Open Source Intelligence: A Strategic Enabler of National Security, CSS Analyses in Security Policy, Vol.3, No.32, April 2008.
  5. M. Karaman, H.Catalkaya. “Institutional Cybersecurity: “A Case Study of Open Source Intelligence and Social Networks”, International Conference on Military Security Studies, Turkey, Istanbul, March 10-11, 2015. K. Goztepe. Designing Fuzzy Rule Based Expert System for Cyber Security. International Journal of Information Security Science, 1(1), 2012, pp.13-19.
  6. Cyberspace Operations, Joint Publication (JP) 3-12 (R), 2013.
  7. J. Spagnuolo-Loretta, R. Brockway and J.C. Burget. “Risk-Based Assessment and Scoping of IV&V Work Related to Information Assurance”, September 14, 2014. Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Preliminary Assessment of National Doctrine and Organization, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 2011.
  8. Cyber Electromagnetic Activities, FM 3-38,
  9. Department of The Army, Available: https://armypubs.us.army.mil/doctrine/index.html.
  10. The Operations Process, FM 5-0,
  11. Department of The Army, March 2010.
  12. S.C. Feng and Y. Zhang. “Conceptual Process Planning- A Definition and Functional Decomposition”. A.E Kober. “Bridging the Planning Gap: Linking Conceptual Army Design to Military Decision-Making”. School of Advanced Military Studies United States Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, 2010. Military Decision Making Process FM 101-5, Department of The Army. Battle Staff Guide. Army National Guard Battle Command Leavenworth, Kansas 66027-2346, August 2010. Center Lea