Cyberattacks do not get the publicization they truly deserve and the public truly does not
understand the severity of them until it happen to them and it’s too late. This article made great
points regarding cyberattacks, threats, and necessary support regarding cyber policies.
The article makes the reader think about how much they truly know about “cyberattacks”
and whether they truly understand the difference between an attack and a threat. It proves that
human interaction with technology and security is that when everything is running efficiently it’s
all good but when an attack happens everyone panics and is confused/frustrated as to how
could this happen not understanding the possibility percentage of an attack which could also
could be due to the lack of details that is given. To help support this, the article states “Past
events show that in many cases, the public internalizes the details of an attack in its immediate
aftermath when media reports are heaviest. While later reports in the days and weeks following
an attack will include far more detailed information, the damage by this time has already been
done and the public is already scared and alert.” When the media release these reports they
should give a full report but they must incorporate a social science tactic of parsimony so that
even the average individual can understand what happened and how to react appropriately.
In the article, the research method was a controlled survey to see how “respondents”
reacted to various attacks that happened which were lethal and nonlethal in Israel, and what
their ideas on cyber policies were afterward. The hypothesis of this experiment was that people
react differently due to the amount of information that is given to them and the amount of
exposure the incident gets. Data and analysis were measured on scales of 1-7 and ran through
an equation to get the group’s total result. A question that was examined throughout the whole
experiment was after seeing these attacks what kind of support should we have behind
cybersecurity policies? The results from this experiment were highly expected, but it states “the
highest level of support for cybersecurity alerts was expressed by the group exposed to lethal
cyberattacks on average, while the other two groups showed lower levels of support for this
policy.”
This was a very interesting topic to read up on and noticed many interesting facts
throughout it. As I was reading through the article I noticed how marginalized groups don’t know
much regarding cyber policies or cyberattacks. A major concern I have regarding this issue is
how much of a disadvantage that puts marginalized groups at and we don’t help. Overall this
study helps contribute to society because if marginalized groups read this article it may
encourage them to get involved and learn. It also contributes in a way of informing society about
the seriousness of cybersecurity and the policies they are trying to implement.
In conclusion, the article was very informative and made me think about policies and the
support we should put in to know them. Cybersecurity is important and in the future, we hope
cyberattacks and threats will be broadcast more with proper information so we can learn and
prepare better rather than panic!
Sources:

Keren L G Snider, Ryan Shandler, Shay Zandani, Daphna Canetti, Cyberattacks,
cyber threats, and attitudes toward cybersecurity policies, Journal of Cybersecurity, Volume
7, Issue 1, 2021, tyab019, https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyab019

https://academic.oup.com/cybersecurity/article/7/1/tyab019/6382745?searchresult=1#40
6984045