After conducting the simulation, Day 1 I scored 68%, Day two I scored 63% and Day 3 I scored 71%. There are several lessons I learned following each of the exams. As an administrator in the telecommunications industry whose largest clients are in the finance industry, I learnt appliance Service Level Agreements, enterprise administration, regulations and security administration (Karadsheh, 2012). During the simulation, I administrated cybersecurity policies, SQL injection, countermeasures, cyber-attacks, digital evidence, outsourcing, mobile technologies and cloud computing. Either way, the client’s needs to be assured that their data is protected and provided when requested. Banking data for microfinance is often a challenging task, the level and damage of attacks would be lethal. Meanwhile, the degree of regulations is often very high and challenging.
From the SIMTRAY simulation, an organization requires constant redress cybersecurity policies. The organization stands a greater opportunity if it integrates managerial decisions, regulations and policies geared towards controlling cybersecurity issues (Gürkaynak, 2014). Day 1 of simulation categorized the nature of system administration attacks while suggesting alternatives to digital evidence and privacy regulations. Day 2 was categorical in analyzing physical threats, presenting more privacy regulations while analyzing the nature of insider threats, and the essence of security in mobile computing. Processing security for bankers is challenging since users can access the enterprise system using personal devices this might be lethal as attackers can take various forms, this destroying the service level agreements (Li and Du 2013). Day 3 was more concerned with the legal approach binding the organization. More so, Day 3 also introduced the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which presented an opportunity for personal information for affiliated third parties.
Ideally, the guidance provided for each of the days is that an enterprise should promote trust; if trust and morality fail, the legal statute would take the case. However, the organization needs to update the user policy agreements on behalf of its clients to avoid possible legal challenges.
Karadsheh, L. (2012). Applying security policies and service level agreement to the IaaS service model to enhance security and transition. Computers & Security, 31(3), 315-326. doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2012.01.003
Li, X., & Du, J. (2013). The adaptive and attribute-based trust model for service-level agreement guarantee in cloud computing. IET Information Security, 7(1), 39-50. doi: 10.1049/iet-ifs.2012.0232Gürkaynak, G., Yilmaz, I., & Taskiran, N. (2014). Protecting communication: Data protection and security measures under telecommunications regulations in the digital age. Computer Law & Security Review, 30(2), 179-189. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2014.01.010
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more