Legal Studies Course LSTD517 Law, Ethics and ... WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory reference. Please use this syllabus

STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a

preparatory reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and

you have access to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on

this syllabus; this syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet

started. If you need to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student

portal. This syllabus is proprietary material of APUS.

Legal Studies Course LSTD517

Law, Ethics and Cybersecurity 3 Credit Hours

8 Weeks Prerequisite(s): None

Table of Contents

Instructor Information Evaluation Procedures

Course Description Grading Scale

Course Scope Course Outline

Course Objectives Policies

Course Delivery Method Academic Services

Course Materials Selected Bibliography

Instructor Information

Instructor: George Guay, J.D., M.Ed. Email: [email protected]; However, in-class

messaging is preferred. Office Hours: Tuesday 8-10 pm Eastern Phone: 617 299 1070 (leave a message and a time when

I can best contact you) Table of Contents

Course Description (Catalog)

This graduate course focuses on the ways that law, ethics and cybersecurity overlap and intersect. Besides laws related to cybersecurity, the course examines laws related to intellectual property, civil litigation, criminal prosecutions, and privacy. This examination will provide the means to identify and analyze the policies reflected in those laws. Those policies could guide the creation of policies on a business-level, using qualitative risk assessment and







planning. An exploration of ethics and cybersecurity, as well as of workplace ethics, will involve the use of an ethical framework.

Table of Contents

Course Scope

Law, ethics and cybersecurity touches on a range of topics. This course will explore some of the issues involve with those topics. Besides looking at basic issues involving cybersecurity, this course will look at what recourse individuals have, under civil law, to address losses incurred due to a violation of cybersecurity. If individuals have concerns, so does state and local government, which will mean looking at the ways that criminal law addresses cybersecurity issues. That will include an analysis of a court's decision regarding the breaking of existing Federal cybersecurity law. Part of the concerns of cybersecurity involves the way of understanding threats to security. From that understanding can come a strategy on how to address them. The development of such an understanding will include an analysis of recent attempts, in the U.S. Senate, to deal with cybersecurity.

Table of Contents

Course Objectives

After completing this course the Student will be able to: 1. Evaluate policies related to cybersecurity

2. Analyze ethics and cybersecurity via the use an ethical framework

3. Explore laws related to cybersecurity issues, including litigation, intellectual

property and privacy

4. Synthesize policies which would best address future issues involving cybersecurity, ethics and law, in light of existing policies

5. Assess the impact that social factors have on law and ethics regarding cybersecurity







6. Produce strategies for qualitative risk assessment and the planning of appropriate protocols

Table of Contents

Course Delivery Method

This Masters in Legal Studies course delivered via distance learning will enable students to complete academic work in a flexible manner, completely online. Course materials and access to an online learning management system will be made available to each student. Online assignments are due by the last day of each week (Sunday Midnight EST) and include Discussion Board questions (accomplished in groups through a threaded discussion board), examinations and quizzes (graded electronically), and individual assignments (submitted for review by the Faculty Member). Assigned faculty will support the students throughout this eight-week course.

Powerpoint presentations will supplement assigned reading. Since many of them come from http://www.powershow.com/, sign up (it's free) so as to be spared having to sit through a commercial every time you use a link to a Powerpoint presentation.

Table of Contents

Course Materials

Course Materials Cyber Security Policy Guidebook. Jennifer L. Bayuk, Jason Healey, Paul Rohmeyer, Marcus H. Sachs, Jeffrey Schmidt, Joseph Weiss Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Print ISBN: 9781118027806 Online ISBN: 9781118241530 DOI: 10.1002/9781118241530 Week 1: Basic topics for understanding cybersecurity







1) Amit Raju Philip, The Legal System and Ethics in Information Security. July 15, 2002. SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room (In Student Resources, Week 1)

2) John Savage, Computer Architecture, Lecture slides from CSCI 1800:

Cybersecurity and International Relations, Feb 1, 2012 (In Student Resources, Week

3) Chapter 2: Cyber Security Evolution 4) David Clark, An Insider’s Guide to the Internet, 2004 (In Student Resources,

Week 1) 5) Appendix E: Technology, Policy, Law, and Ethics Regarding U.S. Acquisition

and Use of Cyberattack Capabilities (2009) Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) (In Student Resources, Week 1)

Week 2: Cybersecurity and civil (tort) law 1) Tort law explained, briefly: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Tort 2) http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence 3) http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/trademark 4) Copyright and trademark infringement: Bayuk, pp. 103, 106-107 (6.1.3 Copyright and Trademarks) 5) Deterring the Spread of Viruses Online: Can Tort Law Tighten the ‘Net’?

Brooks, Robin A. : Review of Litigation; Spring98, Vol. 17 Issue 2, p343, 49p (In Student Resources, Week 2)

6) Tort liability for database processors: theories and recovery, Vincent R.

Johnson, Cybersecurity, Identity Theft, and the Limits of Tort Liability, 57 S.C. L. Rev. 255 (2005) (In Student Resources, Week 2)

Week 3: Cybersecurity and criminal law 1) Bayuk, pp. 125-135 (6.2.4 Cyber Crime) 2) http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/computer_and_internet_fraud







3) Review pages 352-357 from: Deterring the Spread of Viruses Online: Can

Tort Law Tighten the ‘Net’? Brooks, Robin A. : Review of Litigation; Spring98, Vol. 17 Issue 2, p343, 49p (In Student Resources, Week 2) 4) Tyler Moore, Richard Clayton and Ross Anderson, The Economics of Online

Crime, 23 J. Econ. Persp. 3 (2009). (In Student Resources, Week 3) 5) Richard A. Epstein and Thomas P. Brown, Cybersecurity in the Payment

Card Industry, 75 U.Chi. L. Rev. 203 (2008) (In Student Resources, Week 3) 6) Rob Thomas and Jerry Martin, The Underground Economy: Priceless, 31

USENIX ;login: 6 (2006). (In Student Resources, Week 3) 7) US Secret Service, Insider Threat Study: Illicit Cyber Activity in the Banking

and Finance Sector, CERT, 2004 (In Student Resources, Week 3) 8) How to Weed Out the New Insider Cybersecurity Threat. Full Text Available

Security Director's Report. May2007, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p1-12. 5p. 1 Chart. (In Student Resources, Week 3)

9) United States v. Nosal (In Student Resources, Week 3) Week 5: Understanding the nature of cybersecurity 1) Bayuk, Chapter 1: Introduction

2) Bayuk, Chapter 3: Cyber Security Object 3) Bayuk, pp. 175, 180-184 (6.4.5 Security Principles) 4) Introducing the Economics of Cybersecurity: Principles and Policy Options

Tyler Moore (pp. 1-9) (In Student Resources, Week 5) 5) Michel van Eeten and Johannes M. Bauer, Emerging Threats to Internet

Security: Incentives, Externalities and Policy Implications, (2010) Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 17, No. 4 (pp. 1-8) (In Student Resources, Week 5)







6) The Cybersecurity Risk. Communications of the ACM. Jun2012, Vol. 55 Issue 6, p29-32. 4p. 1 Illustration. DOI: 10.1145/2184319.2184330. (In Student Resources, Week 5)

Week 6: Criteria for crafting cybersecurity policy 1) Bayuk, Chapter 4: Guidance of Decision Makers

2) Bayuk, Chapter 5: The Catalog Approach

3) Bayuk, Chapter 6.4.5: Security Principles 4) Cybersecurity Economic Issues: Clearing the Path to Good Practice.

Pfleeger, Shari Lawrence; Rue, Rachel. IEEE Software25. 1 (Jan/Feb 2008): 35. (In Student Resources, Week 6)

5) Norman Schneidewind, Metrics for Mitigating Cybersecurity Threats to

Networks, 14 IEEE Internet Computing 1 (2010) (In Student Resources, Week 6)

6) Michel van Eeten and Johannes M. Bauer, Emerging Threats to Internet

Security: Incentives, Externalities and Policy Implications, (2010) Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 17, No. 4 (pp. 9-13) (In Student Resources, Week 5)

7) Ashish Arora, Anand Nandkumar and Rahul Telang, Does Information

Security Attack Frequency Increase With Vulnerability Disclosure? An Empirical Analysis, 8 Info. Sys. Frontier 5 (2006) (In Student Resources, Week 6)

Week 7: Analysis Paper 1) The Cybersecurity Act of 2012, summary. (In Student Resources, Week 7) 2) The Revised Cybersecurity Act of 2012, summary. (In Student Resources,

Week 7)

*Recommended, but not required: The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, 19th ed., (2010). This is available in hard copy or as an e-text and may be purchased at: http://www.legalbluebook.com/Purchase/Products.aspx







Table of Contents

Evaluation Procedures

PHONE CALLS/E-MAIL: Contact between students and instructor can occur by phone or email. However, the best way to reach your instructor is via email. Students are expected to maintain routine contact with the instructor throughout the course. The number of these contacts may vary according to the specific course and individual student need. Depending on the course, the professor may require these contacts to occur by phone. FOR ALL EMAIL, PLEASE PUT YOUR EMAIL’S SUBJECT IN THE SUBJECT HEADING. If you have not received a response from your instructor within 72 hours, please follow up, as the email may not have been received. Email is strongly preferred! FORUM DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENTS: The assignments will consist of five (5) Forum Discussion assignments. Students are expected to complete these assignments by Sunday at midnight EST of the week in which they are due. The assignments comprise 25% of the final grade and will be posted under “Assignments” in the electronic classroom. For full credit, you must respond to at least two of your classmates’ postings for each week/ topic. Please submit your initial response to the discussion board topic by Thursday at midnight so your classmates can respond to your posting by Sunday. Post your responses to your classmates by the end of the week, Sunday at midnight. Please see more information in the assignment section of the classroom.

To qualify for the maximum possible points for Forum Discussion assignments, students need to post a 500-word minimum initial post and two (2) 250-word minimum follow-up posts. Students are encouraged to make longer, more frequent posts to each Forum Discussion assignment.

Forum Rubric (Graduate Level); 100 points total

Beginning Developing Accomplished Exemplary

Substance (Possible 40 points)

25 points: Presentation is unclear; a basic understanding of the topic and issues is not evident;

30 points: Student’s initial posting did not meet the length requirement; and/or presentation

35 points: Student answered/addressed most aspects of the question/topic posed in the Forum; initial posting met length requirement; a

40 points: Student answered/addressed all aspects of the topic/question posed in the Forum; initial posting met length requirement;







explanation is lacking; segments of the required answer are lacking; sources and supporting facts are not utilized; length requirements may not have been met.

evidences some confusion concerning topics under discussion; analysis may be lacking and/or elements of the question are not answered; support and references may be lacking.

basic understanding of relevant concepts/theories is demonstrated; relevant sources were located; minimal or no facts/examples were used in support of presentation.

analysis of concepts and theories clearly demonstrates superior knowledge and a clear understanding of the topic; relevant and scholarly resources were located and used appropriately; facts and examples are used in support of presentation.

Collaboration (Possible 30 points)

Zero points: Student filed none of the required replies.

15 points: Student filed only one of the required replies OR filed the required replies but failed to meet length requirements.

25 points: Student filed the minimum number of replies, meeting the length requirements and evidencing an understanding of the issues under discussion and the views of colleagues. Student failed to respond to specific queries posed to him by colleagues or by the Instructor. Student did not take initiative in advancing the discussion throughout the week.

30 points: Student filed at least the number of required replies and they met the length requirement; the replies were substantive, thoughtful responses and contributed to the discussion; student exceeded minimum requirements by answering all queries posed to him by others and remained present and actively engaged in the discussion







throughout the week; student led the discussion by raising complex issues, connecting concepts, and illuminating the discussion with examples.

Timeliness (Possible 10 points)

Zero points: Student filed more than two required postings in an untimely manner.

2 points: Student filed two required postings in an untimely manner.

7 points: Student filed one required posting in an untimely manner.

10 points: Student filed all required postings in a timely manner.

Writing (Possible 10 points)

4 points: Writing contains several grammatical, punctuation, and/or spelling errors. Language lacks clarity or includes some use of jargon and /or conversational tone; sentence structure is awkward.

6 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation and spelling, with a few errors; there is room for improvement in writing style and organization.

8 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation, and spelling. Language is clear and precise throughout all submissions. Sentences display consistently strong, varied structure and organization is excellent.

10 points: Student demonstrates a quality of writing consistent with scholarly works in the relevant discipline; student is facile in the use of subject-matter vocabulary and terminology consistent with the level of instruction; student applies concepts with ease; writing style and organization are designed to successfully convey the message and the related information to the reader with maximum effect.







Citations (Possible 10 points; zero points if citations are missing)

4 points: Citations of reference sources exist; citations apparently correspond to the correct source but do not enable the reader to locate the source. Bluebook format not evident.

6 points: Attempts to cite reference sources are made, but the reader has difficulty finding the sources; attempts to use Bluebook format are evident but poorly executed

8 points: Reference sources are cited as necessary, but some components of the citations are missing and/or Bluebook format is faulty in some respects.

10 points: Reference sources relied on by the student are cited appropriately and accurately. No writing of others is left without quotation and/or attribution, as appropriate. Bluebook format is used correctly and consistently.

CASE BRIEF: Students will need to prepare a Case Brief on United States v. Nosal, a copy of which is available under the Student Resources tab, in the folder for Week 3. The assignments comprise 15% of the final grade. The following rubric will describe the format to be used for the brief and the breakdown of points awarded for this exercise.

Case Brief Rubric (Graduate Level); Possible 100 points; Deduction of 10% for untimeliness

Zero points in any category: the required element does not exist in the brief or is unrecognizable in the brief

Beginning Developing Accomplished Exemplary

Case name and case citation (5%) (maximum 5

2 points: The Opinion cannot be

3 points: The Opinion can be located

4 points: Case name is present and parties are

5 points: Case name is correctly stated







points on a 100 point scale)

accurately identified based on the information given and/or the parties’ role in the litigation cannot be discerned.

based on the information provided and the court which rendered it can be discerned, but elements of the case name and/or citation are missing.

identified; citation to the case is given; jurisdiction is evident; errors are minimal.

and parties correctly identified by name and by their role in the litigation; citation to the case itself is complete and accurate and comports with Bluebook format

Facts(10%) (maximum 10 points on a 100 point scale)

6 points: Factual statement is incomplete or erroneous, rendering the brief unusable to the reader, at least in part

7 points: Important facts are missing and/or unnecessary detail is included; reader is confused by the presentation

8 points: Most key/relevant facts are provided; irrelevant facts are omitted; statement of facts is understandable to the reader

10 points: All key/relevant facts are provided; additional facts provided only as necessary for the reader to understand the decision and the court’s analysis; facts are presented clearly and concisely and without error or confusion

Procedural Posture (10%) (maximum 10 points on a 100 point scale)

6 points: Procedural history does not enable the reader to understand the history of the case and/or how it arrived in this

7 points: Gaps in the history of the case or errors in case sequence or case events exist

8 points: The history of the case (where it started and how it came to this court) is presented with minimal errors in sequence or process

10 points: All essential information concerning the history of the case (origin, sequence of case events in various courts, and current







court posture) is included; courts’ names, jurisdictions, and actions are provided and are accurate.

Issue (10%) (maximum 10 points on a 100 point scale)

6 points: The legal issue is incorrectly stated

7 points: The legal issue is identified as a general topic and/or is stated in an overly broad manner; precision is lacking

8 points: The legal question is presented accurately, but lacking in precision and/or is not framed as a question

10 points: The legal question or questions before this court are correctly and succinctly stated and the Issue if framed in terms of a question

Holding (5%) (maximum 5 points on a 100 point scale)

2 points: The court’s resolution of the legal issue is incorrectly presented and/or the Holding of a different court is presented, thus presenting an inaccurate picture of this court’s decision

3 points: The court’s resolution of the legal issue is overly broad or is inaccurate in some regard

4 points: The court’s resolution of the legal issue is accurate but is lacking in precision

5 points: The court’s resolution of the legal issue is correctly and succinctly stated and is not confused with the Judgment or procedural disposition of the case; Issue and Holding “match”

Judgment /Disposition(5%) (maximum 5 points on a 100

2 points: The disposition of the case is erroneously

3 points: The disposition of the case can be discerned

4 points: The disposition of the case is accurately

5 points: The disposition of the case and the relief, in







point scale) presented but is unclear to the reader

stated, but lacks precision

any, granted by the court is accurately and clearly stated

Rationale/Analysis (25%) (maximum 25 points on a 100 point scale)

10 points: The court’s reasoning is erroneously presented, thereby misleading the reader.

15 points: The court’s reasoning is presented in only general terms which are not instructive to the reader

20 points: The court’s reasoning and rationale are accurately presented; some analytical detail may be missing, but there are no errors.

25 points: The court’s reasoning, analysis, and rationale are presented in a complete, succinct, and understandable manner. All relevant considerations are included.

Dissent/Comments/ Significance/Impact (10%) (maximum 10 points on a 100 point scale)

6 points: The student failed to present necessary information about a Dissent or about the significance of the case or presented same in an inaccurate or misleading manner.

7 points: The student noted a Dissent and/or the significance of the case but described same in an unclear manner.

8 points: The student correctly noted the existence of a Dissenting opinion, if any, and accurately described it; information/comments, if any, relate to the opinion in a logical manner.

10 points: The student made a correct decision concerning whether there is additional information or commentary which should be conveyed to the reader, including information about a Dissenting opinion; the information







is conveyed in a clear and accurate manner. Impact on society, if any, is conveyed.

Writing Standards (10%)(maximum 10 points on a 100 points scale)

6 points: Paper contains numerous grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors. Language uses jargon or conversational tone; OR brief fails to use Headings.

7 points: Paper contains several grammatical, punctuation, and/or spelling errors. Language lacks clarity or includes some use of jargon and /or conversational tone. Some headings are missing or fail to correspond to the required elements of the case brief.

8 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation and spelling, with a few minor errors. Headings are used and correspond to the required elements of the case brief.

10 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation, and spelling. Language is clear and precise. Sentences display consistently strong, varied structure. Headings are used and correspond to the required elements of the case brief.







Citation of Sources (10%)(maximum 10 points on a 100 point scale)

6 points: Citations of reference sources exist; citations apparently correspond to the correct source but do not enable the reader to locate the source. Bluebook format lacking.

7 points: Attempts to cite reference sources are made, but the reader has difficulty finding the sources; attempts to use Bluebook format are evident but poorly executed.

8 points: Reference sources and the text of the Opinion itself are cited as necessary, but some components of the citations are missing and/or Bluebook format is faulty.

10 points: Reference sources used by the student, including the text of the Opinion itself, are cited appropriately and accurately. No writing of others is left without quotation and/or attribution, as appropriate. Bluebook format is used correctly and consistently.

ANALYTIC PAPER:

Students are required to submit a 10-15 page writing assignment. All written submissions are required to be DOUBLE SPACED.

This paper involves an analysis of two pieces of legislation from 2012, that dealt with cybersecurity, neither of which was enacted into law. To write this paper, review the summaries of the proposed legislation, prepared by the Library of Congress. NO OUTSIDE RESEARCH IS NEEDED FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT BEYOND THE MATERIALS PROVIDED IN THIS COURSE.







Given the specific topics considered in this course, answer the following questions: 1. How would enacting S. 2105 have improved upon cybersecurity? That is,

what topics raised in class would it have addressed, regarding cybersecurity? 2. How would enacting S. 3414 have improved upon cybersecurity? What

topics raised in class would it have addressed, regarding cybersecurity? 3. What did S. 2105 fail to address, given the topics raised in class? 4. What did S. 3414 fail to address, given the topics raised in class? 5. Based upon these proposed laws, and every topic addressed in this class,

what would you propose as a bill to address cybersecurity? Explain why you addressed the topics that you planned on addressing in your proposed legislation.

In this paper, you must using headings associated with the numbers used here. This paper should run between 10-15 pages. It must be double-spaced, with one inch-margins, 12 font. You may use one quote, of less than 50 words in length and two quotes, of less than 25 words in length. Please be sure to use an in-text citation for all quotes. Include the sources of quotes, as well as your source material, in a reference page, which is separate from the page count needed for this assignment. Your writing assignment is due by the end of Week 7. Submissions made past the deadline can result in a loss of points. Proof read your paper several times to ensure that you have no spelling, grammar or punctuation errors and to ensure that your paper flows well and is organized. Please let me know if you have any questions. FINAL AND MIDTERM EXAMINATIONS: The midterm and final exams will be taken open book. The exams will be posted in the electronic classroom under “Exams.” These exams will be a mix of multiple choice, true/false and essays. The University will issue final official grades. Final grades will be posted in the electronic classroom within 7 days after the course ends.

GRADES: Grades will be assigned as follows:

Grade Instruments Points Possible % of Final Grade







Assignments 25 25%

Case Brief 15 15%

Analytical Paper 20 20%

Midterm 20 20%

Final Examination 20

20%

Table of Contents

Course Outline

Please see the Student Handbook to reference the University’s grading scale.

Week Reading Learning Objectives Assignment 1

Basic topics for understanding

cybersecurity

1) Amit Raju Philip, The Legal System and Ethics in Information Security. July 15, 2002. SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room (In Student Resources, Week 1)

2) John Savage, Computer Architecture, Lecture slides from CSCI 1800: Cybersecurity and International Relations, Feb 1, 2012 (In Student Resources, Week

3) Chapter 2: Cyber Security Evolution 4) David Clark, An Insider’s Guide to the

Internet, 2004 (In Student Resources, Week 1)

5) Appendix E: Technology, Policy, Law, and

Ethics Regarding U.S. Acquisition and Use of Cyberattack Capabilities (2009)

A. Learn about the nature

of computer hardware and software.

B. Explore how computer-

based networked communications work.

C. Discover the basic

issues related to cybersecurity

(1) Post your introduction in the Forum; and (2) Respond to the question posted in the Forum.

(Initial Post due Thursday and 2 replies due Sunday of this week)

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook/grading/index.htm







Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) (In Student Resources, Week 1)

2 Cybersecurity and civil (tort) law

1) Tort law explained, briefly:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Tort

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/trademark 2) Copyright and trademark infringement: Bayuk, pp. 103, 106-107 (6.1.3 Copyright and Trademarks) 3) Deterring the Spread of Viruses Online:

Can Tort Law Tighten the ‘Net’? Brooks, Robin A. : Review of Litigation; Spring98, Vol. 17 Issue 2, p343, 49p (In Student Resources, Week 2)

4) Tort liability for database processors:

theories and recovery, Vincent R. Johnson, Cybersecurity, Identity Theft, and the Limits of Tort Liability, 57 S.C. L. Rev. 255 (2005) (In Student Resources, Week 2)

A. Explain the three categories of torts. B. Describe issues related to liability for misuse of private information C. Explore the need expand tort liability for invasion of privacy in light of the current state of technology.

Respond to the question posted in the Forum.


3 Cybersecurity and criminal law 1) Bayuk, pp. 125-135 (6.2.4 Cyber Crime) 2) http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/computer_a

nd_internet_fraud 3) Review pages 352-357 from: Deterring the

Spread of Viruses Online: Can Tort Law Tighten the ‘Net’? Brooks, Robin A. :

Review of Litigation; Spring98, Vol. 17 Issue 2, p343, 49p (In Student Resources, Week 2)

A. Identify crimes that relate to cybersecurity. B. Explore the nature of cybersecurity threats that could lead to a criminal prosecution. C. Examine the economic dimensions of cybersecurity and cyber threats D. Discuss the nature of

(1) Complete the case brief assignment. See details under the assignment tab for week 3 in the classroom; and







4) Tyler Moore, Richard Clayton and Ross

Anderson, The Economics of Online Crime, 23 J. Econ. Persp. 3 (2009). (In Student Resources, Week 3)

5) Richard A. Epstein and Thomas P.

Brown, Cybersecurity in the Payment Card Industry, 75 U.Chi. L. Rev. 203 (2008) (In Student Resources, Week 3)

6) Rob Thomas and Jerry Martin, The

Underground Economy: Priceless, 31 USENIX ;login: 6 (2006). (In Student Resources, Week 3)

7) US Secret Service, Insider Threat Study:

Illicit Cyber Activity in the Banking and Finance Sector, CERT, 2004 (In Student Resources, Week 3)

8) How to Weed Out the New Insider

Cybersecurity Threat. Full Text Available Security Director's Report. May2007, Vol. 7 Issue 5, p1-12. 5p. 1 Chart. (In Student Resources, Week 3)

9) United States v. Nosal (In Student

Resources, Week 3)

"insider threats" to cybersecurity

(2) Respond to the question posted in the Forum. (Initial Post due Thursday and 2 replies due Sunday of this week)

4 MIDTERM Covering Bayuk Chapter 2, and all assigned reading

Take the open book midterm exam covering Weeks 1-4. This midterm exam will count towards 20% of your final grade.

MIDTERM

5 Understanding the nature of cybersecurity 1) Chapter 1: Introduction 2) Chapter 3: Cyber Security Object 3) 6.4.5 Security Principles, pp. 175, 180-

184

A. Identify the different realms and their concerns when crafting an effective cybersecurity policy. B. Learn about the role that metrics play in


(Initial Post due Thursday







4) Introducing the Economics of Cybersecurity: Principles and Policy Options Tyler Moore (pp. 1-9) (In Student Resources, Week 5)

5) Michel van Eeten and Johannes M.

Bauer, Emerging Threats to Internet Security: Incentives, Externalities and Policy Implications, (2010) Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 17, No. 4 (pp. 1-8) (In Student Resources, Week 5)

6) The Cybersecurity Risk. Communications

of the ACM. Jun2012, Vol. 55 Issue 6, p29-32. 4p. 1 Illustration. DOI: 10.1145/2184319.2184330. (In Student Resources, Week 5)

assessing threats to cyber security. C. Study the connection between security management goals, the nature of vulnerabilities and the creation of security frameworks A. Recognize those factors significantly involved in crafting an effective cybersecurity policy.

and 2 replies due Sunday of this week)

6 Criteria for crafting cybersecurity policy 1) Chapter 4: Guidance of Decision Makers 2) Chapter 5: The Catalog Approach 3) Chapter 6.4.5: Security Principles 4) Cybersecurity Economic Issues: Clearing

the Path to Good Practice. Pfleeger, Shari Lawrence; Rue, Rachel. IEEE Software25. 1 (Jan/Feb 2008): 35. (In Student Resources, Week 6)

5) Norman Schneidewind, Metrics for

Mitigating Cybersecurity Threats to Networks, 14 IEEE Internet Computing 1 (2010) (In Student Resources, Week 6)

6) Michel van Eeten and Johannes M.

Bauer, Emerging Threats to Internet Security: Incentives, Externalities and Policy Implications, (2010) Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 17, No. 4 (pp. 9-13) (In Student Resources, Week 5)

A. Learn about the difference between security theater and true security B. Examine cyberthreats not otherwise addressed in previous weeks C. Measure the effectiveness of a cybersecurity policy. D. Weigh considerations involved in creating a cybersecurity policy









7) Ashish Arora, Anand Nandkumar and

Rahul Telang, Does Information Security Attack Frequency Increase With Vulnerability Disclosure? An Empirical Analysis, 8 Info. Sys. Frontier 5 (2006)

(In Student Resources, Week 6)

7 ANALYSIS PAPER DUE! The Cybersecurity Act of 2012, summary. (In Student Resources, Week 7) The Revised Cybersecurity Act of 2012, summary. (In Student Resources, Week 7)

.

ANALYSIS PAPER DUE!

8 FINAL EXAM

The open book final exam is noncumulative; questions will only be on material from Weeks 5-8. This exam will count towards 20% of your final grade.

FINAL EXAM

Policies

Please see the Student Handbook to reference all University policies. Quick links to frequently asked question about policies are listed below.

Drop/Withdrawal Policy Plagiarism Policy Extension Process and Policy Disability Accommodations

Writing Expectations

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook/withdrawal/index.htm

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook/writing-standards/index.htm#Academic_Dishonesty

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook/extension/index.htm

http://www.apus.edu/student-handbook/rights-responsibilities/index.htm#Disability_Accommodations







All written submissions should be submitted in a font and page set-up that is readable and neat. It is recommended that students try to adhere to a consistent format, which is described below.

Typewritten in double-spaced format with a readable style and font and submitted inside the electronic classroom (unless classroom access is not possible and other arrangements have been approved by the professor).

Arial 11 or 12-point font or Times New Roman styles.

Page margins Top, Bottom, Left Side and Right Side = 1 inch, with reasonable accommodation being made for special situations and online submission variances.

CITATION AND REFERENCE STYLE The central function of legal citation is to allow the reader to efficiently locate the cited source. All courses in the Legal Studies program require that any narrative essay or composition format follow the legal citation guidelines set forth in The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, 20th ed., (2015). More information can be found in the Web Resources and Course Material links in the classroom. Late Assignments Students are expected to submit classroom assignments by the posted due date and to complete the course according to the published class schedule. As adults, students, and working professionals I understand you must manage competing demands on your time. Should you need additional time to complete an assignment please contact me before the due date so we can discuss the situation and determine an acceptable resolution. Routine submission of late assignments is unacceptable and may result in points deducted from your final course grade. Netiquette Online universities promote the advance of knowledge through positive and constructive debate--both inside and outside the classroom. Discussions on the Internet, however, can occasionally degenerate into needless insults and “flaming.” Such activity and the loss of good manners are not acceptable in a university setting--basic academic rules of good behavior and proper “Netiquette” must persist. Remember that you are in a place for the fun and excitement of learning that does not include descent to personal attacks, or student attempts to stifle the discussion of others.

Technology Limitations: While you should feel free to explore the full-range of creative composition in your formal papers, keep e-mail layouts simple. The Educator classroom may not fully support MIME or HTML encoded messages, which means that bold face, italics, underlining, and a







variety of color-coding or other visual effects will not translate in your e-mail messages.

Humor Note: Despite the best of intentions, jokes and--especially--satire can easily get lost or taken seriously. If you feel the need for humor, you may wish to add “emoticons” to help alert your readers: ;-), : ),

Disclaimer Statement Course content may vary from the outline to meet the needs of this particular group.

Table of Contents

Online Library

The Online Library is available to enrolled students and faculty from inside the electronic

campus. It provides access to subscription article databases, periodicals, books, video and

more to support your research and studies. In addition, the Online Library provides

access to special learning resources like tutoring services and Turnitin.com, which the

University has contracted to boost your academic success.

Library Course Guides: APUS librarians have created guides for each degree

program and many courses. Each guide compiles the most relevant research tools

(subscription article databases, journals and ebooks), as well as authoritative

websites, multimedia and more. Explore the guides at

http://apus.campusguides.com/ .

Ask a Librarian: librarians are on duty approximately 18 hours per day, 365 days

per year. At http://apus.libanswers.com/, you can search for answers to library

questions, or use the “Ask” button to submit a question of your own.

Electronic Books and Journals: You can use the online library to access over

150,000 ebooks and 40,000 journals, which are licensed for use by APUS

students and faculty only. Visit the Licensed Library Databases guide to explore

search options.

Research and Writing Help: librarians have created tutorials for college-level

research and writing. Click here to explore them all. Online Tutoring: AMU and APU students are eligible for up to 10 free hours of online

tutoring provided by APUS. Some military students are eligible for additional hours through their Armed Forces education offices. For more information, visit http://apus.campusguides.com/tutor.

Interlibrary Loan and other services: when you need a book or article not held in

the APUS Online Library, you may request it via interlibrary loan (ILL).

http://apus.libanswers.com/

http://apus.campusguides.com/LicensedLibraryDatabases

http://apus.campusguides.com/tutorial_center

http://apus.campusguides.com/tutor







Table of Contents

Documents

Legal Studies Course LSTD517 Law, Ethics and ... WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory reference. Please use this syllabus