{"id":123,"date":"2024-09-19T02:05:04","date_gmt":"2024-09-19T02:05:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.odu.edu\/odupresentationtemplate\/?page_id=2"},"modified":"2024-12-09T03:41:03","modified_gmt":"2024-12-09T03:41:03","slug":"sample-page","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/ramseywil21\/","title":{"rendered":"Cybersecurity 201S"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Ramsey Wilson<\/p>\n\n\n\n

201S<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>\"\"
\n

<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Hi, my name is Ramsey. I’m 19 years old and born on September 26th, making me a Libra. I am from Woodbridge, Virginia, and graduated from Forest Park High School.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I enjoy watching football games, whether at the college or professional level. When I’m not watching sports, I spend time with my pals. I enjoy attending parties and hanging out, whether it’s at someone’s house or at a nearby establishment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am also big on movies. I enjoy everything from action to comedy. I enjoy going to the gym and staying active; working out is a good way for me to clear my mind. In addition, I am a huge fan, particularly of 2K and Madden football. I enjoy the competition and strategy involved in both games.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Journal entry #1<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Roles are divided into seven areas by the NICE Workforce Framework for Cybersecurity, including Analyze, Protect and Defend, Investigate, and Oversight and Governance. I am especially drawn to roles in the analyze category, such as threat analysis and all-source analysis, since they call for the application of critical thinking, deep analytical abilities, and problem-solving techniques in order to identify and reduce cybersecurity threats. My drive for diving into complex issues and coming at sensible choices is in line with these positions. Oversight and governance positions, particularly those involving cybersecurity legal advice and advocacy, are less popular. These professions are more policy and compliance-oriented, requiring legal and regulatory work rather than hands-on technological problems, which may not suit my  more dynamic, technical work in cybersecurity. My career goals are best aligned with areas where I can actively participate in technological problem solving and direct danger prevention. Understanding the importance of governance responsibilities, on the other hand, contributes to a well-rounded cybersecurity viewpoint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #2 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Science principles are crucial to cybersecurity, guiding the development and study of security solutions. The scientific method, which includes observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and analysis, serves as the foundation for developing security procedures and solutions. To improve security tactics, researchers investigate prospective attackers, theorize vulnerabilities, test defenses, and analyze findings. Furthermore, computer science basics such as algorithms and data structures are essential for building encryption techniques and intrusion detection systems. Scientific rigor guarantees that cybersecurity solutions are validated for efficacy and robustness, while ongoing research allows for adaptation to evolving threats. Essentially, scientific principles dictate methodical, evidence-based approaches to protecting digital information and systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #3<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Researchers can examine the frequency and features of data breaches in different industries by using the data on PrivacyRights.org. Scholars can determine which kinds of data are most vulnerable by classifying breaches according to the kind of information disclosed, such as financial information, health records, or personal identity information. They can also look into the typical reasons for breaches, such as insider threats, human error, or cyberattacks. Understanding patterns over time, such as rises in particular attack vectors or newly discovered vulnerabilities, can be gained from this study. Additionally, by knowing how breaches affect impacted people and organizations, better preventative methods and policies may be developed, improving data security procedures all around.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry#4<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maslow\u2019s Hierarchy of Needs provides a helpful way to look at how technology meets different human needs:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Physiological Needs: Technology helps meet essential needs such as food and shelter. For example, apps such as DoorDash and Zillow make it really easy to get meals and find housing options.
Safety Needs: Online banking and cybersecurity tools help keep personal information and financial assets safe, creating a feeling of security.
Belongingness and Love: Social media platforms such as Facebook and WhatsApp help me stay connected with friends and family, making sure I feel included in a community.
Esteem Needs: Professional networks such as LinkedIn allow me to display my accomplishments and receive acknowledgment, which enhances my confidence and sense of self-worth.
E-learning platforms like Coursera really help me explore my potential and work on my personal growth by gaining new knowledge.
Technology really connects with what I need, helping me get things done more efficiently and making my daily experiences more meaningful. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #5<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Journal Entry #6<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fake websites frequently attempt to replicate authentic ones in order to trick users. Here is a comparison.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fake: “G00gle.com” (uses the number “0” instead of “o”)
Real name: “Google.com”
Fake Indicator: A misspelled URL and unusual characters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fake: “Paypa1-services.com” (replaced “l” with “1”).
Real: “Paypal.com”
Fake Indicator: Additional words in the URL and altered characters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fake: “Amaz0n-login.net” (with “.net” instead of “.com” and “0” instead of “o”).
Real: “Amazon.com”
Fake Indicator: The domain name has been altered and uses a nonstandard extension.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Misspelled URLs, strange domain extensions (e.g., “.net” instead of “.com”), and extra words in the domain are all common features of fraudulent websites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #7<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry#8<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal entry #9<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #10 Social cybersecurity is altering national security by focusing on the manipulation of human perceptions and social stability, rather than traditional cybersecurity, which targets information systems. Unlike traditional attacks, social cybersecurity, often known as “cognitive hacking,” aims to exploit societal vulnerabilities and change behaviors, attitudes, and faith in institutions through information warfare.

The piece focuses on Russia’s strategic use of deception, or “information blitzkrieg,” to divide and destabilize other states by sowing division. This tactic, based on Soviet-era propaganda techniques, uses modern technology to wage a non-physical sort of warfare that destabilizes governments from inside.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A major lesson is the multidisciplinary nature of social cybersecurity, which combines sciences such as sociology, psychology, and computational science to better identify and combat these threats. In modern warfare, sustaining societal cohesion and trust is as important as safeguarding physical infrastructure. As social cybersecurity evolves, military and policy leaders must integrate these insights to ensure national security in an increasingly interconnected world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #11<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #12 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Economic Theories 1. Cost-Benefit Analysis<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This economic theory looks at decisions by weighing the costs and benefits to get the most utility possible. The letter highlights the importance of reducing harm to those impacted while also keeping the organization’s liability in check. The organization is offering free credit monitoring for individuals, which shows they’re trying to balance the financial cost of these services with the possible reputational and legal risks of not handling things properly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Behavioral Economics<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Behavioral economics includes psychological insights that influence economic decision-making, and it connects to the letter by examining how consumers react after a breach. The letter aims to handle public perception and rebuild trust by recognizing the breach, giving clear instructions, and providing support like credit monitoring. This connects with concepts such as loss aversion, which focuses on reducing perceived harm to individuals, and nudging, which involves steering recipients toward certain protective actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Social Science Theories
1. Social Contract Theory<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This theory looks at the unspoken agreements that exist between people and organizations within a society. The organization recognizes its duty to safeguard customers’ data, which is a key aspect of the social agreement in our digital world. The breach shows that there was a problem with this contract, and the letter is trying to fix things by saying sorry and explaining what steps will be taken to make it right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Theory of Risk Society<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ulrich Beck\u2019s Risk Society theory from sociology is really important. It suggests that today’s societies are more and more structured around handling risks, especially those that arise from technological progress. The breach and the notification letter show this idea: the organization faces risks linked to digital technology and tries to handle the societal impacts, like possible financial loss or identity theft for its customers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In conclusion
The sample breach letter shows how organizations use economic ideas and social theories to deal with the consequences of cybersecurity incidents. When we look at it using cost-benefit analysis, behavioral economics, social contract theory, and risk society theory, we can understand how it balances responsibility, accountability, and the effects on society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #13 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal Entry #14<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Journal entry #15<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Davin’s journey to his career really highlights how important it is to have a mix of different fields of study. A career in digital forensics involves more than just technical skills such as recovering data or analyzing logs; it also requires an understanding of human behavior, motivation, and patterns. Digital forensics investigators usually search for digital footprints to understand why someone behaved in a particular manner. This connects closely to the study of how we make decisions and behave, along with insights from sociology about how culture and the environment influence those choices. Davin’s career path shows how important it is to have skills from different fields in today’s jobs. His mix of technical training and knowledge of human factors helps him effectively handle both the technical and social aspects of cybercrime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Name: Ramsey Wilson
Title: The Role of Social Science in Cybersecurity: Cybersecurity Analyst

The introduction
Cybersecurity analysts are the ones who keep businesses safe from online threats that are always
changing. The job requires technical knowledge, but it also requires knowledge of how people
behave, how cultures interact, and how society affects them. This essay looks at how ideas from
social sciences like psychology, sociology, and human factors are used in the daily work of
cybersecurity researchers. It also looks at how these concepts affect underrepresented groups and
help make cybersecurity more fair for everyone.

Human Factors in Cybersecurity
The way people act is a big factor in safety. Analysts study human factors to make systems that
reduce the chances of mistakes made by people. Some of the most common ways that data is
stolen are using weak passwords and clicking on fake links. Studies have shown that using
behavioral study to improve user interface designs can cut down on mistakes by a large amount.
Cyber Security analysts use these insights to create training programs that focus on user-centered
practices like making alerts clear and security measures easier to understand.

Case in Point: Raising Awareness of Cybersecurity
For example, more and more companies are using game-based training to teach their workers
about cyber dangers. These methods, which are based on learning and psychology theories, have
been shown to improve memory and encourage proactive behavior, making people less
vulnerable to attacks like phishing.

Psychology and Online Safety
To understand how people react to cyber dangers, you need to know a lot about psychology.
Cognitive flaws, like overconfidence or optimism bias, help analysts predict what mistakes users
will make. They also figure out the emotional causes that attackers use in phishing schemes, like
fear or a sense of urgency.

The Role of Social Influence in Security
Researchers have found that users are more likely to take security steps if their friends tell them
to. Cybersecurity Analysts take advantage of this by building social influence tactics into their
tools and campaigns. For example, they might show how many coworkers or friends use
multifactor authentication. Based on a study of Facebook’s security tools, these methods have
greatly boosted the number of people using them.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cybersecurity and Cultural Change
At both the organizational and societal levels, culture norms shape how cybersecurity is done.
Analysts have to change their plans to fit how people from different cultures feel about privacy,
power, and technology. In global companies, differences in how people share and talk about data
can be a security risk if they are not managed properly.

Subcultures of Cybersecurity
Different subcultures in the cybersecurity field affect how people act and how they solve
problems. For example, ethical hacking groups put a lot of value on being open and sharing
skills, while corporate cybersecurity teams put a lot of value on lowering risks and keeping
information private. Analysts know how to handle these subcultures to figure out why attackers
do what they do and make defenses stronger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Different ways of looking at sociology in cyberspace
Understanding the connection between technology and society is possible with the help of
sociology. Experts use these models to study how cyber threats and changes in technology affect
people. One example is the digital gap, which means that not everyone has the same access to
technology. This leaves marginalized groups open to harm. Analysts push for security policies
that protect all of these groups, which is part of larger efforts for social justice.

What Effects Social Forces Have on Cybersecurity.
Three big social changes that have an effect on cybersecurity are globalization, economic
inequality, and the rise of social media. Cybersecurity experts deal with problems like
cybercrime that crosses borders, taking advantage of weak communities, and the spread of false
information on social media sites. Analysts can make systems that reduce risks and support
social stability by understanding these forces.

Cybersecurity Analyst are very important when it comes to fighting for the safety of
underrepresented groups. Most of the time, these groups don’t have the tools or understanding to
protect themselves from advanced cyber threats. Analysts make sure that these communities are
protected fairly by creating tools and training programs that are easy for everyone to use. As an
example of how cybersecurity helps protect human rights, safe communication tools have been
created to keep activists safe in places where politics are harsh.

In conclusion
Cybersecurity Analyst are a good example of how technical knowledge and social science can
work together. They improve the efficiency of security measures while addressing societal
inequality by using ideas from psychology, sociology, and cultural studies. Their work not only
keeps digital systems safe, but it also makes online safer and more welcoming for everyone. This
method from different fields shows how important social science is for dealing with the tough
problems in cybersecurity today.

List of References
Triplett, W. J. Taking Human Factors into Account in Cybersecurity Leadership. Journal of
Privacy and Cybersecurity.
Sauvik, S. Social Persuasion and Safety Behaviors. A look at cybersecurity.
Nye, B. Changes in social dynamics in cybersecurity. This is the International Journal of
Cybersecurity Research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Ramsey Wilson
October 02, 2024<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article Review #1: A Critical Examination of Cybercrime Laws and Freedom of Expression in Jordan<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alaeldin Mansour Maghaireh’s study, Cybercrime Laws in Jordan and Freedom of Expression: A Critical Examination of the Electronic Crimes Act 2023, delves into Jordan’s cybercrime legislation and its potential consequences for freedom of expression. The paper examines the growth of Jordan’s cybercrime laws, culminating in the contentious Electronic Crimes Act of 2023. This review examines how the paper corresponds with social science concepts, investigates the research methodologies used, and considers the study’s societal implications, particularly for marginalized groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research Questions and Hypotheses<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The key research question that guides the study is: “To what extent do recent legislative changes, including Jordan’s Electronic Crimes Act 2023, impact freedom of expression in the context of cybercrime?” The paper proposes the premise that, while the changes address specific cybercrime challenges, they also jeopardize fundamental freedoms such as free expression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research Methods and Data Analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maghaireh adopts a qualitative research technique, doing a thorough content study of legal documents pertaining to Jordan’s cybercrime legislation. The study’s data were derived from legislative materials, including the Electronic Crimes Act of 2023 and its revisions. A comparative legal analysis is utilized to compare this Act to past incarnations of cybercrime legislation. The study focuses on trends and legislative changes, particularly those involving constraints on free expression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Social Science Principles in the Study<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article discusses essential social science themes, namely how legal frameworks interact with society behavior in cyberspace. The study acknowledges the role of law in controlling human conduct, as well as the importance of safeguarding individual rights while ensuring public safety in the digital sphere. These features are consistent with the nomothetic method, as the research aims to generalize the impact of legislation on society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Challenges and Marginalized Groups<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The report focuses on how vulnerable groups, particularly human rights activists and journalists, may experience disproportionate limitations under the Electronic Crimes Act of 2023. The legislation’s wide definitions of cyber defamation and online incitement could be used to muzzle criticism, limiting freedom of expression for these vulnerable groups. This raises issues of equity and human rights in the context of cybersecurity legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Contributions to Society<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maghaireh’s work helps considerably to the argument over balancing cybersecurity and individual rights. The article provides information on how states might legislate cybercrime while still protecting fundamental liberties. By critically assessing Jordan’s new legislation, the study promotes continuous discussions about the ethical consequences of such laws, not only in Jordan but around the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, this article gives an important study of the issues that arise when balancing cybercrime regulation and freedom of expression. The findings highlight the necessity of protecting human rights, particularly for underrepresented populations, in the face of fast changing cybersecurity regulations. The study’s contribution is especially important in our increasingly digitalized world, where governments must negotiate the delicate confluence of security and freedom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maghaireh, A. M. (2024). Cybercrime Laws in Jordan and Freedom of Expression: A Critical Examination of the Electronic Crimes Act 2023. International Journal of Cyber Criminology<\/em>, 18(1), 15-36. https:\/\/cybercrimejournal.com\/menuscript\/index.php\/cybercrimejournal\/article\/view\/268\/96<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Article Review #2: Perception of Cyberattacks and Public Support for Cybersecurity Policies<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ramsey Wilson
November 15, 2024<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article, “Cyberattacks, Cyber Threats, and Attitudes Toward Cybersecurity Policies” by Snider, Shandler, Zandani, and Canetti (2021) investigates how exposure to various forms of cyberattacks effects public support for cybersecurity policies. Using a randomized survey experiment, the authors show how perceptions of cyber dangers influence the relationship between attack exposure and policy preferences, providing insights into the psychological and societal consequences of cyber threats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Relation to Principles of Social Sciences<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This study applies social science ideas by investigating how external cues, such as exposure to cyber dangers, influence human behavior. It emphasizes the importance of threat perception in determining political opinions, connecting individual psychological responses to larger society policy choices. This is consistent with sociological theories of risk perception and decision-making under uncertainty, demonstrating how personal experiences with cyber dangers can impact group results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research Questions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study addresses two main research questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Does exposure to cyberattacks influence public support for intrusive cybersecurity policies?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. How do perceptions of cyber threats mediate this relationship?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    These questions highlight the psychological mechanisms underlying public opinion formation and the role of media framing in shaping attitudes toward cybersecurity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Research Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The authors employed a controlled randomized survey experiment methodology, subjecting 1,022 Israeli participants to simulated television news on either lethal or nonlethal assaults on national infrastructure. This strategy provided strict control over variables, allowing researchers to isolate the impacts of various types of threat exposure on policy preferences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Information and Analysis<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A quantitative analysis of survey results was conducted to gauge shifts in support for cybersecurity regulations. The study found:Broad Results: Support for strict cybersecurity measures grew as a result of cyberattack exposure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n