Difference between revisions of "UNIK4750 Group Work"
From its-wiki.no
Josef.Noll (Talk | contribs) (→Suggestions for Group Work) |
Josef.Noll (Talk | contribs) m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
= Suggestions for Group Work = | = Suggestions for Group Work = | ||
The main goal for your project work is to analyse an application scenario with respect to security and privacy. Thus, | The main goal for your project work is to analyse an application scenario with respect to security and privacy. Thus, | ||
| − | + | :1. establish the application goals with respect to security and privacy | |
| − | + | :2. have a system in mind that delivers the expected applications | |
| − | + | :3. sub-divide the system into sub-systems and components | |
| − | + | :4. identify the security and privacy functionalities in your sub-system(s) and components. | |
| − | + | :5. analyse the system or a sub-system using the multi-metrics method | |
| − | : 5.1 establish metrics for your s,p-attributes | + | :: 5.1 establish metrics for your s,p-attributes |
| − | : 5.2 define the weight for the specific s,p-attributes of your components/resp. sub-system | + | :: 5.2 define the weight for the specific s,p-attributes of your components/resp. sub-system |
| − | : 5.3 perform the multi-metrics analysis | + | :: 5.3 perform the multi-metrics analysis (calculation) |
| − | + | :6. compare the outcome of the system analysis s,p<sub>system</sub> with your application goals s,p<sub>goals</sub> | |
| − | + | :7. evaluate your results, e.g. by identifying components/functionalities which influence your system | |
| − | * see [[Media:2016031-Project-Ideas.pdf]] for details | + | :8. suggest further work, and provide reasons for those suggestions |
| + | |||
| + | * see [[Media:2016031-Project-Ideas.pdf]] for more details and the example of smart home services | ||
= Evaluation criteria for Group Work= | = Evaluation criteria for Group Work= | ||
| − | Your presentation is expected to last for 25- | + | The results of your work should be presented during the last lecture, and a short report (max 12 pages) has to be established. The report can be separate, or can just be a description of what is on you slides. |
| − | Your presentation will be evaluated with respect to the following criteria: | + | |
| + | Your presentation is expected to last for 25-35 min. Your presentation will be evaluated with respect to the following criteria: | ||
| − | Use case | + | Application scenario/Use case |
| − | * ''what | + | * ''To what extend does the application scenario address security and privacy?'' |
| − | Identification of | + | Identification of s,p-functionalities in the sub-system(s) and components |
| − | * '' | + | * ''which are the s,p-goals you want to address, which security attributes do they need?'' |
| − | * '' | + | * ''which s,p-functionalities can be provided to address the s,p-goals?'' |
| − | + | Suitability of metrics and weighting | |
| − | * '' | + | * ''to what extend are the identified metrics addressing the s,p-functionalies?'' |
| − | * '' | + | * ''how good is the choice of parameters for the metrics justified?'' |
| + | * ''to what degree is the weighting appropriate?'' | ||
| − | + | Multi-metrics analysis and evaluation | |
| − | * '' | + | * ''is the outcome of the multi-metrics analysis sound?" |
| + | * ''do the system parameters s,p<sub>system</sub> identify the system properly?'' | ||
| + | * ''does the multi-metrics analysis provide knowledge for a system engineer?'' | ||
| − | + | Critical review and future work | |
| − | * '' | + | * ''are the critics well reasoned?'' |
| − | * '' | + | * ''do what degree is the future work addressing shortcomings?'' |
Latest revision as of 19:00, 25 April 2016
| Wiki for ITS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Suggestions for Group Work
The main goal for your project work is to analyse an application scenario with respect to security and privacy. Thus,
- 1. establish the application goals with respect to security and privacy
- 2. have a system in mind that delivers the expected applications
- 3. sub-divide the system into sub-systems and components
- 4. identify the security and privacy functionalities in your sub-system(s) and components.
- 5. analyse the system or a sub-system using the multi-metrics method
- 5.1 establish metrics for your s,p-attributes
- 5.2 define the weight for the specific s,p-attributes of your components/resp. sub-system
- 5.3 perform the multi-metrics analysis (calculation)
- 6. compare the outcome of the system analysis s,psystem with your application goals s,pgoals
- 7. evaluate your results, e.g. by identifying components/functionalities which influence your system
- 8. suggest further work, and provide reasons for those suggestions
- see Media:2016031-Project-Ideas.pdf for more details and the example of smart home services
Evaluation criteria for Group Work
The results of your work should be presented during the last lecture, and a short report (max 12 pages) has to be established. The report can be separate, or can just be a description of what is on you slides.
Your presentation is expected to last for 25-35 min. Your presentation will be evaluated with respect to the following criteria:
Application scenario/Use case
- To what extend does the application scenario address security and privacy?
Identification of s,p-functionalities in the sub-system(s) and components
- which are the s,p-goals you want to address, which security attributes do they need?
- which s,p-functionalities can be provided to address the s,p-goals?
Suitability of metrics and weighting
- to what extend are the identified metrics addressing the s,p-functionalies?
- how good is the choice of parameters for the metrics justified?
- to what degree is the weighting appropriate?
Multi-metrics analysis and evaluation
- is the outcome of the multi-metrics analysis sound?"
- do the system parameters s,psystem identify the system properly?
- does the multi-metrics analysis provide knowledge for a system engineer?
Critical review and future work
- are the critics well reasoned?
- do what degree is the future work addressing shortcomings?
