Abstract

A common problem in risk analysis is to characterize the overall security of a system of valuable assets (e.g., government buildings or communication hubs), and to suggest measures to mitigate any hazards or security threats. Currently, analysts typically rely on a combination of indices, such as resilience, robustness, redundancy, security, and vulnerability. However, these indices are not by themselves sufficient as a guide to action; for example, while it is possible to develop policies to decrease vulnerability, such policies may not always be cost-effective.Motivated by this gap, we propose a new index, defensibility. A system is considered defensible to the extent that a modest investment can significantly reduce the damage from an attack or disruption. To compare systems whose performance is not readily commensurable (e.g., the electrical grid vs. the water-distribution network, both of which are critical, but which provide distinct types of services), we defined defensibility as a dimensionless index.After defining defensibility quantitatively, we illustrate how the defensibility of a system depends on factors such as the defender and attacker asset valuations, the nature of the threat (whether intelligent and adaptive, or random), and the levels of attack and defense strengths and provide analytical results that support the observations arising from the above illustrations. Overall, we argue that the defensibility of a system is an important dimension to consider when evaluating potential defensive investments, and that it can be applied in a variety of different contexts.

Highlights

  • One of the central concerns of the fields of security studies and risk analysis is protecting a set of critical assets or a system from disruptions or attacks (E. Banks, 2005; Haimes, 2016)

  • Security analysis to date has been intently focused on existing notions such as vulnerability and resilience

  • We proposed a new index, defensibility

Read more

Summary

Introduction

One of the central concerns of the fields of security studies and risk analysis is protecting a set of critical assets or a system from disruptions or attacks (E. Banks, 2005; Haimes, 2016). The case of natural events is similar, except that the attack is modeled as a stationary threat rather than responding to defense investments It has been observed (Bier et al, 2007a) that, in some systems, the defender may lack the ability to tangibly improve the security of a system, even with a substantial budget of resources. Prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979; Sunstein, 2003) suggests that public perceptions of terrorism risk are relatively insensitive to probabilities, so defensibility might be defined to focus primarily on reducing the maximum possible damage, without regard to likelihood From this perspective, defense effort could improve the residual value of the system in question by reducing the damage from attacks. The random case can be used to represent disruption due to accidents or natural disasters that are likely to affect any asset, as well as disruption due to an attacker who is indifferent or uninformed

Notation n
Reformulation of defensibility for discrete assets
Data sets
Same-value deterministic optimal attackers
Stochastic attacks
Differing attacker and defender valuations
Negative skew
Deterministic attackers
Stochastic attackers
Discussion
Directions for future work
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call