Create A Risk Mitigation Strategy That The Organization Should Have Followed In Light Of The 2014 Hack

This assignment requires you to complete a cyber risk mitigation strategy for Sony Pictures Entertainment organization.  you are required to create a risk mitigation strategy that the organization should have followed in light of the 2014 hack.  Introduction  Write a brief paragraph in which you provide a high-level overview of SPE need for a risk mitigation strategy.   (150 words)  Vision  Outline SPE’s vision of what implementing a risk mitigation strategy will ideally achieve.  (150 words)   Strategic goals and objectives List at least four strategic goals SPE must achieve to reduce its risks to an acceptable level. List at least two objectives under each strategic goal that explain what must be done to achieve the strategic goal.  Note: A thorough risk mitigation strategy should include associated action plans and milestones, but you are not required to detail these for the purposes of this submission.  (450 words)  Start writing here:  Metrics  List at least three metrics SPE will use to analyze the achievement of its goals/objectives. These metrics should be specific to the goals/objectives listed in the previous question.   (150 words)  Start writing here:  Threat actors and methods of attack Integrate your submission from Module 2, in which you identified at least two threat actors to SPE, and described methods of attack these actors could use.  If you are using the Sony case, integrate the submission in which you identified the threat actor Sony faced in the 2014 hack and their method of attack, as well as at least one other threat actor Sony could face in the future and what method of attack they might use.  (550 words)  Start writing here:  Business critical assets  identified the assets that are most essential to Sony’s ability to accomplish its mission. Describe what vulnerabilities there may be in SPE’s systems, networks, and data that may put these assets at risk.  (550 words)  Start writing here:  Cybersecurity governance    Integrate the three questions from your Assignment, in which you recommended a cybersecurity leadership plan, improvements to management processes, and a cybersecurity awareness training program.  (1,200 words)  Start writing here:  Protective technologies  In one of your submission, you compiled a list of questions you would ask to understand the technologies implemented to protect your organization’s critical systems, networks, and data. In this section, based on the questions you asked and by conducting any other additional research, identify technologies your organization can employ to protect its critical systems, networks, and data.  If you are using the Sony case, recommend protective technologies that could have addressed Sony’s shortcomings in protecting their critical networks, systems, and data.   (650 words)   Start writing here:  Legal considerations  research discuss the legal considerations SPE should consider when compiling its risk mitigation strategy.  recommend steps that could have addressed Sony’s shortcomings in protecting themselves from legal action.    (550 words)  Start writing here:  Your ongoing project submission will be graded according to the following rubric: Very poor Poor Satisfactory Very good Exceptional Adherence to the brief  All sections in the template are completed.  Answer falls within the prescribed word count (4,500 words).  No submission, or student fails to address any element of the brief. (0) Some key elements are not addressed. Most information provided is irrelevant.   OR Answer does not fall within the prescribed word count (100 words over word count). (5.5) Student has adhered to most of the brief. Sufficient information is provided and is mostly relevant. (7) Student has adhered to almost all elements of the brief. Almost all information is provided and is relevant. (8.5) Student has fully adhered to the brief. All information provided is comprehensive and relevant. (10) Introduction and vision  Student has clearly outlined the need for their risk mitigation strategy, and what it aims to achieve by implementing the strategy.   Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to clearly outline the need for the strategy or its long-term vision.     There is no evidence that the student has used the content covered in the course to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of the need for their strategy, or its long-term vision.  There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the content covered in the course but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the need for their strategy, and its long-term vision.  The student has clearly engaged with the content covered in the course, but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of the need for their strategy, and its long-term vision. The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5)   Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of the need for their strategy, and its long-term vision.  The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Strategic goals and objectives  Student has outlined at least four strategic goals that will reduce their organization’s risks to an acceptable level. They have included at least two objectives that clearly explain what must be done to achieve each goal.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to clearly outline their strategy’s goals and objectives.   There is no evidence that the student has used the content covered in the course to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of their strategy’s goals and objectives.  There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the content covered in the course but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of their strategy’s goals and objectives.  The student has clearly engaged with the content covered in the course, but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of their strategy’s goals and objectives.  The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5)   Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of their strategy’s goals and objectives.  The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Metrics  The student has listed at least three metrics their organization could use to measure the achievement of their goals, and the metrics are specific to the goals/objectives identified.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content.  No submission. OR  Student fails to list three metrics their organization could use to measure cybersecurity. The metrics are not specific to the identified goals/objectives.  There is no evidence that the student has used the content covered in the course to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of metrics their organization could use to measure its cybersecurity.  The metrics lack relevance to the identified goals/objectives.  There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the course content, but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the metrics their organization could use to measure its cybersecurity and they are relevant to the goals and objectives identified.  The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of the metrics their organization should use, and they are specific to the goals/objectives identified. The answer shows a strong grasp of the content.  (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of the metrics their organization can use, and they are specific to the goals/objectives identified. The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Cybersecurity threat actors  Student has identified at least two threat actors and described a scenario of an attack.  In the case of Sony, student has accurately identified the threat actor and method of attack in the 2014 hack, as well as one other potential threat actor. Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content and has applied this to their chosen organization. No submission. OR  Student fails to list two threat actors that could attack their organization. They have not provided a possible method of an attack.  There is no evidence that the student has used the course content to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of the threat actors who could attack their organization and the possible method of attack.   There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the course content, but this is not always accurately applied.  (5.5 Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the threat actors who could attack their organization and the possible method of attack.  The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required. (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of the threat actors who could attack their organization and the possible method of attack.  The answer shows a strong grasp of the content.   (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of the threat actors who could attack their organization and the possible method of attack.   The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Business critical assets  Student has identified the assets that are most essential to their organization, and described vulnerabilities these assets may be exposed to.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to identify the assets that are critical to their organization and accurately describe how these assets are vulnerable.  There is no evidence that the student has used the course content to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of their organization’s critical assets, and how they are vulnerable.  There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the course content but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of their organization’s critical assets, and how they are vulnerable.  The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of their organization’s critical assets, and how they are vulnerable.  The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of their organization’s critical assets, and how they are vulnerable. The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Cybersecurity governance  Student has recommended cybersecurity leadership plan, improvements to management processes, and a cybersecurity awareness training program.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to recommend a cybersecurity leadership plan, improvements to management processes, and a cybersecurity awareness training program.  There is no evidence that the student has used the course content to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of cybersecurity leadership plans, management processes, and cybersecurity awareness training programs. There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the course content but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of cybersecurity leadership plans, management processes, and cybersecurity awareness training programs. The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of cybersecurity leadership plans, management processes, and cybersecurity awareness training programs. The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of cybersecurity leadership plans, management processes, and cybersecurity awareness training programs. The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Protective technologies  Student has accurately identified protective technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their organization’s cybersecurity.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to identify protective technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their organization’s cybersecurity.  There is no evidence that the student has used the course content to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of the necessary protective technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their cybersecurity. There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the content covered in the course but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their cybersecurity.   The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of the technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their cybersecurity.  The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of the technologies that are, or should be, implemented to enhance their cybersecurity.   The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Legal considerations Student has critically analyzed the legal considerations their organization should take into account.  Student has thought critically and incorporated learnings from the content. No submission. OR  Student fails to critically analyze the legal considerations their organization should take into account.  There is no evidence that the student has used the course content to inform their response. (0) Student shows an incomplete understanding of legal considerations that their organization should take into account.  There is some evidence that the student has engaged with the course content but this is not always accurately applied. (5.5) Student demonstrates satisfactory understanding of legal considerations that their organization should take into account.  The student has clearly engaged with the course content but a more nuanced answer is required.   (7) Student demonstrates a strong understanding of the legal considerations their organization should take into account.  The answer shows a strong grasp of the content. (8.5) Student demonstrates a thorough and incisive understanding of the legal considerations their organization should take into account.  The student has been able to critically apply their learning from the course. (10) Application of course content to organizational context The student has accurately applied the learnings from the course content to their own organization or Sony’s unique context.  No submission OR The student has not made use of their organization’s unique organizational context and constraints to inform their response (0)  Student has demonstrated a limited understanding of their organization’s unique context and constraints and context (5.5)  Student has demonstrated a satisfactory understanding of their organization’s context and constraints, however a there is room for deeper engagement with its nuances. (7)  There is clear evidence that the student has thought about their organization’s unique context and constraints, and catered for this in their strategy accordingly. (8.5) There is strong evidence that the student has understood and thought carefully about their organization’s unique context and constraints, and has provided considered recommendations in their strategy accordingly. (10)  Organization of writing Answer should be structured clearly and logically. No submission or complete lack of logical structure. (0) Answer has some logical structure, but not enough to justify a passing grade. (5.5)  Answer is structured fairly well in terms of logic and clarity. (7) Answer is structured very well in terms of logic and clarity. (8.5)  Answer is structured exceptionally well in terms of logic and clarity. (10)