what are some ways to be proactive in preventing logical reconnaissance control attacks
Added by Allen H.
Step 1
Step 1: **Educate Employees** Conduct regular training sessions for employees to raise awareness about logical reconnaissance control attacks, including how to identify suspicious activities and the importance of safeguarding sensitive information. Show more…
Show all steps
Your feedback will help us improve your experience
Akash M and 99 other AP CS educators are ready to help you.
Ask a new question
Labs
Want to see this concept in action?
Explore this concept interactively to see how it behaves as you change inputs.
Key Concepts
Recommended Videos
Based on your research, identify at least two compelling threats to the User Domain and two effective security controls used to protect it. Be sure to cite your sources.
Akash M.
In general, the security defenses should be based on five fundamental security principles: layering, limiting, diversity, obscurity, and simplicity. Write your own proposal strategies to prevent malware delivery and limit cyber-security incidents. Analyze these proposed strategies and provide clear demonstration (justification) for your approach.
Madhur L.
Security personnel generally have two goals when using a honeypot. A honeypot can deflect or redirect threat actors' attention away from legitimate servers by encouraging them to spend their time and energy on the decoy server, distracting their attention from the data on the actual server. A honeypot can also trick threat actors into revealing their attack techniques. Once these techniques are discovered, it can then be determined if actual production systems could thwart such an attack. However, honeypots can introduce risk. A honeypot, once attacked and compromised, could be used as a launching pad to attack and infiltrate other systems, either those of the organization itself or another organization. Although honeypots should be designed to "capture" the threat actor, a misconfiguration could inadvertently give an attacker an actual platform to attack other systems. If a threat actor were able to do this, would the organization that set up the honeypot then be liable? How would you define "without authorization"? The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) imposes both criminal and civil liability on someone who intentionally accesses a computer "without authorization" or "exceeds authorized access" to obtain information from the computer. Some businesses argue that "without authorization" also applies to security researchers who are probing programs or apps for vulnerabilities. Often these businesses do not want security researchers looking into their security (or lack of it). One such company filed a brief in a court case stating that "necessary research and testing can be performed by authorized parties... and shows how unauthorized research and public dissemination of unvalidated or theoretical security vulnerabilities can actually cause harmful effects." Should "without authorization" be used to prohibit security researchers who want to pinpoint vulnerabilities? Or can it still allow for security researchers to find unknown vulnerabilities in software—even if they have not been asked to?
Recommended Textbooks
Computer Science and Information Technology
Introduction to Programming Using Python
Computer Science - An Overview
Transcript
18,000,000+
Students on Numerade
Trusted by students at 8,000+ universities
Watch the video solution with this free unlock.
EMAIL
PASSWORD