Constraints on Off-Axis GRB Jets in Type Ibc Supernovae From Late-Time Radio Observations

It has been suggested that the peculiar properties of the luminous Type Ic supernova SN 1998bw and its low-energy gamma-ray burst GRB 980425 may be understood if they originated in a standard gamma-ray burst explosion viewed far from the axis of the relativistic jet. In this scenario, strong radio emission is predicted from the jet on a timescale 1 to 10 years after the explosion as it decelerates and spreads into our line of sight. To test this hypothesis we have carried out late-time radio observations of SN 1998bw at $t=5.6$ years, yielding upper limits which are consistent with the continued fading of the supernova. We find these limits to be consistent with an off-axis jet only if the progenitor mass loss rate is $\dot{M}\lesssim 4 \times 10^{-7}$ M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (for a wind velocity $v_w=1000$ km s$^{-1}$) or the fraction of the shock energy in magnetic fields is $\epsilon_B \lesssim 10^{-3}$. These values are low relative to those inferred for cosmological GRBs. We combine the SN 1998bw measurements with existing observations for a sample of 15 local Type Ibc supernovae to estimate that at most 6% produce collimated, relativistic outflows.Comment: Revised version, as it appears in ApJ

SN1998bw: The Case for a Relativistic Shock

SN1998bw shot to fame by claims of association with GRB980425. Independent of its presumed association with a GRB, this SN is unusual in its radio properties. A simple interpretation of the unusually bright radio emission leads us to the conclusion that there are two shocks in this SN: a slow moving shock containing most of the ejecta and a relativistic shock (Gamma=2) which is responsible for the radio emission. This is the first evidence for the existence of relativistic shocks in supernovae. It is quite plausible that this shock may produce high energy emission (at early times and by inverse Compton scattering). As with other supernovae, we expect radio emission at much later times powered primarily by the slow moving ejecta. This expectation has motivated us to continue monitoring this unusual SN.Comment: A&A (in press), Rome GRB Symposium, Nov. 199

Towards Validating Risk Indicators Based on Measurement Theory

Due to the lack of quantitative information and for cost-efficiency purpose, most risk assessment methods use partially ordered values (e.g. high, medium, low) as risk indicators. In practice it is common to validate risk scales by asking stakeholders whether they make sense. This way of validation is subjective, thus error prone. If the metrics are wrong (not meaningful), then they may lead system owners to distribute security investments inefficiently. Therefore, when validating risk assessment methods it is important to validate the meaningfulness of the risk scales that they use. In this paper we investigate how to validate the meaningfulness of risk indicators based on measurement theory. Furthermore, to analyze the applicability of measurement theory to risk indicators, we analyze the indicators used by a particular risk assessment method specially developed for assessing confidentiality risks in networks of organizations

The Role of Deontic Logic in the Specification of Information Systems

In this paper we discuss the role that deontic logic plays in the specification of information systems, either because constraints on the systems directly concern norms or, and even more importantly, system constraints are considered ideal but violable (so-called `soft¿ constraints).\ud To overcome the traditional problems with deontic logic (the so-called paradoxes), we first state the importance of distinguishing between ought-to-be and ought-to-do constraints and next focus on the most severe paradox, the so-called Chisholm paradox, involving contrary-to-duty norms. We present a multi-modal extension of standard deontic logic (SDL) to represent the ought-to-be version of the Chisholm set properly. For the ought-to-do variant we employ a reduction to dynamic logic, and show how the Chisholm set can be treated adequately in this setting. Finally we discuss a way of integrating both ought-to-be and ought-to-do reasoning, enabling one to draw conclusions from ought-to-be constraints to ought-to-do ones, and show by an example the use(fulness) of this

RiskREP: Risk-Based Security Requirements Elicitation and Prioritization

Companies are under pressure to be in control of their assets but at the same time they must operate as efficiently as possible. This means that they aim to implement "good-enough security" but need to be able to justify their security investment plans. In this paper, we present a Risk-Based Requirements Prioritization method (RiskREP) that extends misuse case-based methods with IT architecturebased risk assessment and countermeasure definition and prioritization. Countermeasure prioritization is linked to business goals to achieve and based on cost of countermeasures and their effectiveness in reducing risks. RiskREP offers the potential to elicit complete security countermeasures, but also supports the deliberate decision and documentation of why the security analysis is focused on certain aspects. We illustrate RiskREP by an application to an action case