Practicing a Science of Security: A Philosophy of Science Perspective

Our goal is to refocus the question about cybersecurity research from 'is this process scientific' to 'why is this scientific process producing unsatisfactory results'. We focus on five common complaints that claim cybersecurity is not or cannot be scientific. Many of these complaints presume views associated with the philosophical school known as Logical Empiricism that more recent scholarship has largely modified or rejected. Modern philosophy of science, supported by mathematical modeling methods, provides constructive resources to mitigate all purported challenges to a science of security. Therefore, we argue the community currently practices a science of cybersecurity. A philosophy of science perspective suggests the following form of practice: structured observation to seek intelligible explanations of phenomena, evaluating explanations in many ways, with specialized fields (including engineering and forensics) constraining explanations within their own expertise, inter-translating where necessary. A natural question to pursue in future work is how collecting, evaluating, and analyzing evidence for such explanations is different in security than other sciences

Research & Action Report, Spring/Summer 2015

In this issue: Black History Month in Germany Commentary with Layli Maparyan, Ph.D. Commentary with Linda Charmaraman, Ph.D. Depression Prevention and Obstetric Fistula New Connections New Findings & Publications Prevention of Child & Adolescent Depression in Latin America Q&A with Sari Pekkala Kerr, Ph.D. Spotlight on New Funding & Projects Women’s Studies and Women in Academiahttps://repository.wellesley.edu/researchandactionreport/1026/thumbnail.jp

Air Force Institute of Technology Research Report 2019

This Research Report presents the FY19 research statistics and contributions of the Graduate School of Engineering and Management (EN) at AFIT. AFIT research interests and faculty expertise cover a broad spectrum of technical areas related to USAF needs, as reflected by the range of topics addressed in the faculty and student publications listed in this report. In most cases, the research work reported herein is directly sponsored by one or more USAF or DOD agencies. AFIT welcomes the opportunity to conduct research on additional topics of interest to the USAF, DOD, and other federal organizations when adequate manpower and financial resources are available and/or provided by a sponsor. In addition, AFIT provides research collaboration and technology transfer benefits to the public through Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs). Interested individuals may discuss ideas for new research collaborations, potential CRADAs, or research proposals with individual faculty using the contact information in this document

Air Force Institute of Technology Research Report 2012

This report summarizes the research activities of the Air Force Institute of Technology’s Graduate School of Engineering and Management. It describes research interests and faculty expertise; lists student theses/dissertations; identifies research sponsors and contributions; and outlines the procedures for contacting the school. Included in the report are: faculty publications, conference presentations, consultations, and funded research projects. Research was conducted in the areas of Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Electro-Optics, Computer Engineering and Computer Science, Systems and Engineering Management, Operational Sciences, Mathematics, Statistics and Engineering Physics

Digital Leader-Followership for the Digital Age: A North American Perspective

This chapter examines the emerging literature on contemporary leadership, particularly leadership in the digital age, digital leadership, e-leadership, and cyber leadership, in the context of socio-cultural changes, theoretical shifts in leadership studies, and leadership education changes observed in the United States in the last two decades. Although the above literature shows a shift from leader-centered and hierarchical to follower-centered and relational leadership, it is not clear how the old may yield to the new paradigm of leadership. There seem to be no discussion in the leadership literature on how to transition from pre-digital to digital era of leadership. While this study acknowledges the discontinuity and tension between the contemporary and the traditional leadership approaches, it offers theoretical and practical alternatives for transitioning from traditional to contemporary leadership in the digital age. Since leadership research has already shifted from single-role identity to multiple-role identities, which enables individuals to acquire and master both leading and following skills in today’s organizations, this study is optimistic that the leader-follower trade (LFT) or similar approaches may build bridges between digital native and digital immigrant generations of leader-followers for a smoother transition from hierarchical to distributed, shared, collective, and adaptive leadership for the digital age

Annual Research Report, 2010-2011

Annual report of collaborative research projects of Old Dominion University faculty and students in partnership with business, industry and government.https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/or_researchreports/1000/thumbnail.jp

Jack Voltaic 3.0 Cyber Research Report

The Jack Voltaic (JV) Cyber Research project is an innovative, bottom-up approach to critical infrastructure resilience that informs our understanding of existing cybersecurity capabilities and identifies gaps. JV 3.0 contributed to a repeatable framework cities and municipalities nationwide can use to prepare. This report on JV 3.0 provides findings and recommendations for the military, federal agencies, and policy makers

Acquiring the Tools of Grand Strategy: The US Navy\u27s LCS as a Case Study

Grand strategy is about how states allocate resources and employ these resources to achieve desired political conditions. In examining the match between desired ends and available ways and means, an often-overlooked subject is how the specific tools of grand strategy are forged. One of these tools is the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), a Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) that started in 2000. LCS remains a controversial and often unpopular program with many stakeholders to this day. This study examines how the means of grand strategy, in this case a new ship class, are acquired. It also looks at how these means are employed (ways) to achieve the desired outcomes (ends) and the feedback loop between means, ways, and ends. The initial portion of the study examines how the U.S. Department of Defense and Department of the Navy formally acquire systems or “systems of systems.” The second portion of the study examines the design, construction, and fielding of the LCS class or the attainment of Initial Operational Capability (IOC). The final portion analyzes the design, construction, and introduction of the LCS into the fleet in terms of the three models used by Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow in Essence of Decision; the Rational Actor Model (RAM), Organizational Behavior, and Governmental Politics – Models I, II, and III respectively. The hypothesis is that individual personalities may have more influence than any of these models account for and that instances of individual impact may offer more nuanced insights into these models of state behavior. This study reveals that the process of evolutionary acquisition and spiral development caused increased risk in the time-line for achieving Final Operational Capacity (FOC) of LCS. It also provides insight into the reaction and adaption of a large organization to changes in its environment. This study does not however reveal strong evidence to support the hypothesis of individual personalities significantly influencing decision making or action taking compared to organizations in Models I-III. The details of individual participation and internal deliberations are obscured by security and proprietary rules which privileges models I and II in the analysis

Air Force Institute of Technology Research Report 2018

This Research Report presents the FY18 research statistics and contributions of the Graduate School of Engineering and Management (EN) at AFIT. AFIT research interests and faculty expertise cover a broad spectrum of technical areas related to USAF needs, as reflected by the range of topics addressed in the faculty and student publications listed in this report. In most cases, the research work reported herein is directly sponsored by one or more USAF or DOD agencies. AFIT welcomes the opportunity to conduct research on additional topics of interest to the USAF, DOD, and other federal organizations when adequate manpower and financial resources are available and/or provided by a sponsor. In addition, AFIT provides research collaboration and technology transfer benefits to the public through Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs). Interested individuals may discuss ideas for new research collaborations, potential CRADAs, or research proposals with individual faculty using the contact information in this document