ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Effective safeguards for computer system integrity
Full text PdfPdf (1.06 MB)
Source AFIPS Joint Computer Conferences archive
Proceedings of the June 7-10, 1976, national computer conference and exposition table of contents
New York, New York
SESSION: Computers and people: societal concerns table of contents
Pages 75-84  
Year of Publication: 1976
Authors
Norman R. Nielsen  Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California
Brian Ruder  Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California
David H. Brandin  Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California
Sponsor
AFIPS : American Federation of Information Processing Societies
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 5,   Downloads (12 Months): 8,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1499799.1499811
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the findings of a project to identify types of computer system integrity safeguards that would have been effective in preventing, detecting, or mitigating the effects of actual reported incidents of computer system integrity violations. More than 350 cases were analyzed and categorized among one of 26 types of violations and among one or more of 34 types of applicable safeguards. Brief definitions are provided for all categories, and distributions of incidents over the various violation categories and over the applicable safeguards are presented.

The analysis revealed that most safeguards have a surprisingly narrow range of applicability, whether measured by number of cases or by number of violation categories affected. However, much broader violation coverage is possible through use of combinations of small numbers of safeguards. Directions for further research are discussed, including the need to develop measures of violation category importance and to include a consideration of safeguard cost, effectiveness, and operability factors.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Parker, D. B., S. Nycum, and S. Oüra, Computer Abuse, Stanford Research Institute, 1973, (NTIS: PB 231 320/AS).
Collaborative Colleagues:
Norman R. Nielsen: colleagues
Brian Ruder: colleagues
David H. Brandin: colleagues