SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1502.05532

Comparing Decision Support Approaches for Cyber Security Investment

Abstract

When investing in cyber security resources, information security managers have to follow effective decision-making strategies. We refer to this as the cyber security investment challenge. In this paper, we consider three possible decision-support methodologies for security managers to tackle this challenge. We consider methods based on game theory, combinatorial optimisation and a hybrid of the two. Our modelling starts by building a framework where we can investigate the effectiveness of a cyber security control regarding the protection of different assets seen as targets in presence of commodity threats. In terms of game theory we consider a 2-person control game between the security manager who has to choose among different implementation levels of a cyber security control, and a commodity attacker who chooses among different targets to attack. The pure game theoretical methodology consists of a large game including all controls and all threats. In the hybrid methodology the game solutions of individual control-games along with their direct costs (e.g. financial) are combined with a knapsack algorithm to derive an optimal investment strategy. The combinatorial optimisation technique consists of a multi-objective multiple choice knapsack based strategy. We compare these approaches on a case study that was built on SANS top critical controls. The main achievements of this work is to highlight the weaknesses and strengths of different investment methodologies for cyber security, the benefit of their interaction, and the impact that indirect costs have on cyber security investment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Andrew Fielder, Emmanouil Panaousis, Pasquale Malacaria, Chris Hankin, Fabrizio Smeraldi. 2015-02-19. Comparing Decision Support Approaches for Cyber Security Investment. https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05532

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT