|Assignment ID Number||AFFGEHU83939HD|
|Type of Document||Essay|
|Number of Pages||10 Pages|
Case Study 2: Information Security and the National Infrastructure
Write a two to four (3) page paper in which you:
Explain in your own words the information security concerns that exist in protecting the United States national infrastructure.
Describe why the author of the article says that oil and gas industries are prime targets for cyber criminals more than other infrastructures and state whether or not you agree and why.
Conclude why there is a need to regulate SCADA and industrial control systems and why there is concern that this is not being dealt with appropriately.
Use at least three (3) quality resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar Websites do not qualify as quality resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the students name, the professors name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
Explain the national infrastructure plan in the context of strategic targets.
Use technology and information resources to research issues in homeland security.
Write clearly and concisely about topics related to Homeland Security Organization and Administration using proper writing mechanics and technical style conventions.
|Criteria||0 – 1 Points||2 – 3 Point||4 – 5 Points||Total|
|Professional communication||Unprofessional communication; many errors; no APA||Minor grammar, spelling, and APA errors||Postings are professional and in standard written English with APA|
|Complete addressing of assessment criteria||Criteria not fully addressed||Minimal response to criteria; minor aspects missing||All criteria are fully addressed|
|Evidence of critical thinking or extending information||Critical thinking or extending information not evident||Obvious responses to questions; little thought evident||Posts demonstrate critical thinking with evidence base from research or experience|
|Course connections.||No connections provided||Minimal connections provided to readings/activities||Clear connections to readings/activities|
|Submitted an overview / summary of the case selected for analysis. Also identified those procedural steps to be analyzed.||Did not provide an adequate overview or summary of the selected case or failed to identify those steps to be analyzed.||Provides an adequate overview or summary of the selected case and steps to be analyzed though may not be clear or complete.||Case overview is clearly presented including all appropriate investigative steps to be analyzed.|