The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis
碩士 === 淡江大學 === 資訊管理學系碩士班 === 93 === Risk assessment is a critical step before performing information security management. Usually, risk is a subjective judgment, hence qualitative risk analysis methods are widely use for risk assessment. However, important information assets are often being omitted...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Others |
Language: | zh-TW |
Published: |
2005
|
Online Access: | http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/30985264143993682867 |
id |
ndltd-TW-093TKU05396006 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-TW-093TKU053960062015-10-13T11:57:25Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/30985264143993682867 The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis 論資訊安全風險分析之謬誤 Kuan-Chang Chen 陳冠彰 碩士 淡江大學 資訊管理學系碩士班 93 Risk assessment is a critical step before performing information security management. Usually, risk is a subjective judgment, hence qualitative risk analysis methods are widely use for risk assessment. However, important information assets are often being omitted while using many popular risk analysis methods. For this reason, this thesis will point out the problem in using qualitative risk analysis methods, especially in rationality of assets calculation and the rank reversal phenomenon. The cautious when using qualitative risk analysis methods are then being addressed. Furthermore, the most common referred international standards and guides are reviewed. Suggestions for using those methods are also proposed. Te-Chao Liang 梁德昭 2005 學位論文 ; thesis 58 zh-TW |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
zh-TW |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
description |
碩士 === 淡江大學 === 資訊管理學系碩士班 === 93 === Risk assessment is a critical step before performing information security management. Usually, risk is a subjective judgment, hence qualitative risk analysis methods are widely use for risk assessment. However, important information assets are often being omitted while using many popular risk analysis methods. For this reason, this thesis will point out the problem in using qualitative risk analysis methods, especially in rationality of assets calculation and the rank reversal phenomenon. The cautious when using qualitative risk analysis methods are then being addressed. Furthermore, the most common referred international standards and guides are reviewed. Suggestions for using those methods are also proposed.
|
author2 |
Te-Chao Liang |
author_facet |
Te-Chao Liang Kuan-Chang Chen 陳冠彰 |
author |
Kuan-Chang Chen 陳冠彰 |
spellingShingle |
Kuan-Chang Chen 陳冠彰 The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
author_sort |
Kuan-Chang Chen |
title |
The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
title_short |
The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
title_full |
The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
title_fullStr |
The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
The Fallacies of Information Security Risk Analysis |
title_sort |
fallacies of information security risk analysis |
publishDate |
2005 |
url |
http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/30985264143993682867 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT kuanchangchen thefallaciesofinformationsecurityriskanalysis AT chénguānzhāng thefallaciesofinformationsecurityriskanalysis AT kuanchangchen lùnzīxùnānquánfēngxiǎnfēnxīzhīmiùwù AT chénguānzhāng lùnzīxùnānquánfēngxiǎnfēnxīzhīmiùwù AT kuanchangchen fallaciesofinformationsecurityriskanalysis AT chénguānzhāng fallaciesofinformationsecurityriskanalysis |
_version_ |
1716851282477580288 |