Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Cyber War Games: Strategic Jostling Among Traditional Adversaries Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2015 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

6. Cyber Counterdeception: How to Detect Denial & Deception (D&D)

verfasst von : Dr. Kristin E. Heckman, Dr. Frank J. Stech

Erschienen in: Cyber Warfare

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In this chapter we explore cyber-counterdeception (cyber-CD), what it is, and how it works, and how to incorporate counterdeception into cyber defenses. We review existing theories and techniques of counterdeception and relate counterdeception to the concepts of cyber attack kill chains and intrusion campaigns. We adapt theories and techniques of counterdeception to the concepts of cyber defenders’ deception chains and deception campaigns. We describe the utility of conducting cyber wargames and exercises to develop the techniques of cyber-denial & deception (cyber-D&D) and cyber-CD. Our goal is to suggest how cyber defenders can use cyber-CD, in conjunction with defensive cyber-D&D campaigns, to detect and counter cyber attackers.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Game-Theoretic Foundations for the Strategic Use of Honeypots in Network Security
Nächstes Kapitel Automated Adversary Profiling
Fußnoten
1
Boush et al. (2009). Market research shows consumer resistance or susceptibility to persuasion can be driven by processes that operate entirely outside the conscious awareness of the consumer; e.g., Laran et al. (2011).
 
2
McNair (1991).
 
3
Whaley (2006) further wrote: “Counterdeception is … now standard jargon among specialists in military deception. This useful term was coined in 1968 by Dr. William R. Harris during a brainstorming session with me in Cambridge, Massachusetts.” Harris’s papers, while widely influencing other scholars of deception and counterdeception, are hard to come by. Epstein (1991) cites Harris (1968). Other relevant Harris counterdeception papers Epstein cited include Harris (1972); and Harris (1985).
 
4
Boush et al. (2009), inDeception in the Marketplace: The Psychology of Deceptive Persuasion and Consumer Self Protection, advocate “deception protection” for consumers (Chap 1) to help them “detect, neutralize and resist the varied types of deception” in the marketplace.
 
5
Bodmer et al. (2012) noted Chinese cyber deception in cyber wargaming (p. 82): “reports of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) advancing their cyber-deception capabilities through a coordinated computer network attack and electronic warfare integrated exercise.” We found no references explicitly to cyber exercises ofcyber-counterdeception.
 
6
Rowe used the termcounterdeception, we believe he meant what we term herecounter-deception; Rowe (2004). Rowe (2003) proposed a counterplanning approach to planning and managing what we termcounter-deception operations. A recent description of counter-deception, “a multi-layer deception system that provides an in depth defense against … sophisticated targeted attacks,” is Wang et al. (2013).
 
7
For a general analysis of denial techniques in cyber-counter-deception (cyber-C-D), see Yuill et al. (2006).
 
8
STIX and the STIX logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. The STIX license states: The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) hereby grants you a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use Structured Threat Information Expression (STIXTM) for research, development, and commercial purposes. Any copy you make for such purposes is authorized provided you reproduce MITRE’s copyright designation and this license in any such copy (seehttp://​stix.​mitre.​org/​).
 
9
TAXII and the TAXII logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. The TAXII license states: The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) hereby grants you a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use Trusted Automated Exchange Indicator Information (TAXIITM) for research, development, and commercial purposes. Any copy you make for such purposes is authorized provided you reproduce MITRE’s copyright designation and this license in any such copy (seehttp://​taxii.​mitre.​org/​).
 
10
Other than a few references to detecting deception in social engineering situations, we found no research on cyber-counterdeception, per se, in general searching of the scholarly literature.
 
11
Some (e.g., Bennett and Waltz2007) would credit “incongruity analysis” to R. V. Jones, and his theory of spoofing and counter-spoofing. See Jones (2009), pp. 285–291: “the perception of incongruity—which my ponderings have led me to believe is the basic requirement for a sense of humour—[concluding]… the object of a practical joke [is] the creation of an incongruity.”
 
12
For example, Heuer (1981). Whether or not deception is detected, assessing hypotheses regarding the adversary’s possible courses of action against the evidence provides useful insights into adversary intentions. Heuser (1996) wrote, : “The [counterdeception] cell would be tasked to … [look] at the data from the enemy’s point of view. They would need to place themselves in the mind of the enemy, determine how they would develop a deception plan and see if evidence supports it…. The enemy may not be employing a deception plan, but the process will aid in exploring different enemy courses of action that may have been overlooked.,” Bruce and Bennett (2008) wrote: “the failure to generate hypotheses increases vulnerability to deception…One key to Why Bad Things Happen to Good Analysts has been conflicting organizational signals regarding promotion of overconfidence (“making the call”) versus promotion of more rigorous consideration of alternative hypotheses and the quality of information;” in George and Bruce (2008).
 
13
See, for example (Lachow2011; Sanger2012; Langner2013; Lindsay2013).
 
14
Although originally referred to as the “Intrusion Kill Chain” by the authors of the related seminal paper, the concept is now more generally referred to as “Cyber Kill Chain.” Seehttp://​www.​lockheedmartin.​com/​us/​what-we-do/​information-technology/​cyber-security/​cyber-kill-chain.​html.
 
15
Croom (2010). The author, Lieutenant General Charles Croom (Ret.) is Vice President of Lockheed Martin Information Systems and Global Solutions.
 
16
Gilovich et al. (2002) and Dawes (2001).
 
17
Heuer (1981) and Elsässer and Stech (2007).
 
18
See Fischhoff (1982).
 
19
See Stech and Elsässer (2007).
 
20
“2nd Bureau of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Staff Department’s (GSD) 3rd Department, which is most commonly known by its Military Unit Cover Designator (MUCD) as Unit 61398.” Unit 61398 functions as “the Third Department`s premier entity targeting the United States and Canada, most likely focusing on political, economic, and military-related intelligence,” Stokes et al. (2011).
 
21
There is nothing new in proposing deception versus counterdeception in RED versus BLUE wargames or applying these wargames to the cyber domain; see, for example, Feer (1989) and Cohen et al. (2001)
 
22
Some recent wargame examples are described in Alberts et al. (2010). Joint Chiefs of Staff (2006) recommends wargaming plans and courses of action for information operations. Wargaming by DOD may be less frequent than suggested by doctrine and history, e.g., regarding the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia a U.S. Army War College analysis concluded “U.S. intelligence-gathering and analysis regarding the Russian threat to Georgia failed. … No scenarios of a Russian invasion were envisaged, wargamed, or seriously exercised;” p. 72, Cohen and Hamilton (2011).
 
23
Wheaton (2011) recommends a game-based approach to teaching strategic intelligence analysis to increase learning, improve student performance, and increase student satisfaction;.
 
24
For example, Pérez2004 wrote: “The risks vs. benefits of committing [military rescue] forces must be weighed and war-gamed carefully between all civilian/military leaders prior to committing the military arm [to a hostage rescue mission]. ”
 
25
Even when wargames are designed to explore future concepts and capabilities, they must provide a realistic basis for these innovations and a realistic environment for the exploration. See, for example, Rosen1991; Murray and Millet1996,2000; Scales and Robert2000; Knox and Murray2001; and Fisher2005.
 
26
On the other hand, counterdeception analysis can be performed synchronously in live exercises or asynchronously on “cold cases.” That is, an asynchronous counterdeception reconstruction of D&D operations from forensic materials, historical records, and other materials can be readily performed. Such asynchronous analyses are common in counter-fraud, cheating detection, art forgery analysis, malingering, etc. For example, see Stech and Elsässer (2007)
 
27
Bennett and Waltz (2007) cite the National Intelligence Council’s (2000, p. 9) conclusion regarding the future use of deception: “most adversaries will recognize the information advantage and military superiority of the United States in 2015. Rather than acquiesce to any potential US military domination, they will try to circumvent or minimize US strengths and exploit perceived weaknesses [though] greater access … to sophisticated deception-and-denial techniques…”
 
28
See, for example, Bodmer et al. (2012): “There is a very well-developed legal framework to deal with intruders, and as one of the “good guys” your responses are bound by that framework. You can expect to work closely with legal counsel to ensure that your operation is legal… But this does not mean that there are no ethical consequences to your actions. Even if your specific [cyber-D&D] operation does not push ethical boundaries, taken collectively, the actions of you and your colleagues just may.”
 
29
What Whaley (2007e) found (as might be expected) is subtle: Some cultures are clearly more deceptive than others but only during given slices of time. No single culture has excelled in deceptiveness throughout its history; while the Chinese since the 1940s have shown high levels of military-political deceptiveness, this is not true throughout Chinese history. In a given culture and time, levels of deceptiveness can be quite different across major disciplines of military, domestic politics, foreign diplomacy, and commercial business. Sometimes ends justify means, practical considerations of greed and survival sometimes override religious, moral, or ethical objections to deception. High, medium, and low levels of deceptive behavior were found in every culture at different times and regardless of its level of technology. We found no comparisons of counterdeception capabilities across cultures comparable to Whaley’s analysis of cultural deceptiveness.
 
30
Not all observers agree with Jones’s and Whaley’s concept of a “counterdeception analyst’s advantage” over deceivers, and some tend to see the deception-counterdeception contest in terms of (to use Handel’s (2005) characterization), “the persistent difficulty involved in attempting to expose deception” i.e., more along the lines of Fig. 6.5, above (Matrix of Attacker’s Denial & Deception Moves versus Defender’s Counterdenial and Counterdeception Moves). For example, Scot Macdonald (2007) sees the deceivers as generally holding the advantages over deception detectives as new tools, technologies, channels, and environments become available.
 
31
An ad hoc search on “growth of the global cyber security industry” yielded a 2014 estimate of about $77 billion, and a 2019 estimate of about $ 156 billion, i.e., more than doubling in 5 years, or roughly seven times faster growth than estimates of the growth of the global economy over the 2014–2019 time frame. Seehttp://​www.​asdnews.​com/​news-53610/​Global_​Cyber_​Security_​Market_​to_​be_​Worth_​$76.​68bn_​in_​2014.​htm; http://​www.​marketsandmarket​s.​com/​PressReleases/​cyber-security.​asp; andhttp://​www.​conference-board.​org/​pdf_​free/​GEO2014_​Methodology.​pdf.
 
32
See, for example Caverni and Gonzalez (1990) and Yetiv (2013).
 
33
One 2009 report suggested the Chinese will employ integrated network electronic warfare which includes “using techniques such as electronic jamming, electronic deception and suppression to disrupt information acquisition and information transfer, launching a virus attack or hacking to sabotage information processing and information utilization, and using anti-radiation and other weapons based on new mechanisms to destroy enemy information platforms and information facilities.” Krekel (2009).
 
Literatur
Alberts, David S., Reiner K. Huber, & James Moffat (2010) NATO NEC C2 Maturity Model. Washington, DC: DoD Command and Control Research Program.
Anderson, Robert H. et al. (1999) Securing the U.S. Defense Information Infrastructure: a Proposed Approach. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Arquilla, John & Douglas A. Borer, eds. (2007)Information Strategy and Warfare: A Guide to Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge.
Bennett, M., & E. Waltz (2007)Counterdeception Principles and Applications for National Security. Norwood, MA: Artech House.
Bloom, Richard (2013)Foundations of Psychological Profiling: Terrorism, Espionage, and Deception. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
Bodmer, Sean, Max Kilger, Gregory Carpenter, & Jade Jones (2012)Reverse Deception: Organized Cyber Threat Counter-Exploitation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Boush, David M., Marian Friestad, & Peter Wright (2009)Deception in the Marketplace: The Psychology of Deceptive Persuasion and Consumer Self Protection. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.
Bruce, James B. & Michael Bennett (2008) “Foreign Denial and Deception: Analytical Imperatives,” in George, Roger Z. & James B. Bruce (2008)Analyzing Intelligence: Origins, Obstacles, and Innovations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Calbert, Gregory (2007) “Learning to Strategize,” in Kott, Alexander and William M. McEneaney (2007)Adversarial Reasoning: Computational Approaches to Reading the Opponent’s Mind. Chapman & Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL.
Caverni, Fabre & Michel Gonzalez, eds. (1990)Cognitive Biases. New York: Elsevier
Cohen Ariel & Robert E. Hamilton (2011) The Russian Military and the Georgia War: Lessons and Implications. ERAP Monograph, June 2011, Carlisle Barracks, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College.
Dacier, Marc, Corrado Leita, Olivier Thonnard, Van-Hau Pham, & Engin Kirda (2010) “Assessing Cybercrime Through the Eyes of the WOMBAT,” in Jajodia, Sushil, Peng Liu, Vipin Swarup, & Cliff Wang, eds. (2010)Cyber Situational Awareness: Issues and Research. New York: Springer.
Dawes, R.M. (2001)Everyday Irrationality: How Pseudo Scientists, Lunatics, and the Rest of Us Systematically Fail to Think Rationally. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Defense Science Board (2012) Task Force Report: Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.
Elsässer, Christopher & Frank J. Stech (2007) “Detecting Deception,” in Kott, Alexander & William M. McEneaney, eds. (2007)Adversarial Reasoning: Computational Approaches to Reading the Opponent’s Mind. Boca Raton FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
Epstein, Edward Jay (1991)Deception: The Invisible War Between the KGB and the CIA. New York: Random House.
Feer, Fred S. (1989)Thinking-Red-in-Wargaming Workshop: Opportunities for Deception and Counterdeception in the Red Planning Process. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, May 1989.
Fischhoff, B., (1982) “Debiasing,” in Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, & A. Tversky, eds. (1982)Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 1982, pp. 422–444.
Fisher, David E. (2005)A Summer Bright and Terrible: Winston Churchill, Lord Dowding, Radar, and the Impossible Triumph of the Battle of Britain. Berkeley CA: Shoemaker & Hoard.
Fredericks, Brian (1997) “Information Warfare: The Organizational Dimension,” in Robert E. Neiison, ed. (1997)Sun Tzu and Information Warfare. Washington, DC: National Defense University Press.
Gerwehr, Scott, & Russell W. Glenn (2002).Unweaving the Web: Deception and Adaptation in Future Urban Operations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Gilovich, T., D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (2002)Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gowlett, Phillip (2011)Moving Forward with Computational Red Teaming. DSTO-GD-0630, March 2011, Joint Operations Division, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Canberra Australia.
Harris W. R. (1968) “Intelligence and National Security: A Bibliography with Selected Annotations.” Cambridge MA: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University.
Harris W. R. (1972) “Counter-deception Planning,” Cambridge MA: Harvard University.
Harris W. R. (1985) “Soviet Maskirovka and Arms Control Verification,” mimeo, Monterey CA: U.S. Navy Postgraduate School, September 1985.
Handel, Michael (2005)Masters of War: Classical Strategic Thought. London: Frank Cass–Taylor & Francis
Heckman, K. E., M. J. Walsh, F. J. Stech, T. A. O’Boyle, S. R. Dicato, & A. F. Herber (2013). Active Cyber Defense with Denial and Deception: A Cyber-wargame Experiment.Computers and Security, 37, 72–77. doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2013.03.015
Heuer, Jr., Richards J. (1981) “Strategic Deception and Counterdeception: A Cognitive Process Approach,”International Studies Quarterly, v. 25, n. 2, June 1981, pp. 294–327.
Heuser, Stephen J. (1996)Operational Deception and Counter Deception. Newport RI: Naval War College, 14 June 1996.
Jajodia, Sushil, Peng Liu, Vipin Swarup, & Cliff Wang, eds. (2010)Cyber Situational Awareness: Issues and Research. New York: Springer.
Johnson, Paul E., S. Grazioli, K. Jamal, and R. G. Berryman (2001) “Detecting Deception: Adversarial Problem Solving in a Low Base-rate World,”Cognitive Science, v.25, n.3, May-June.
Joint Chiefs of Staff (2006) Joint Publication 3–13Information Operations. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.
Jones, R.V. (1995) “Enduring Principles: Some Lessons in Intelligence,”CIA Studies in Intelligence, v. 38, n. 5, pp. 37–42.
Jones, R. V. (2009)Most Secret War. London: Penguin. Croom (2010).
Knox, MacGregor & Williamson Murray (2001)The dynamics of Military Revolution 1300–2050. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kott, Alexander, & Gary Citrenbaum, eds. (2010).Estimating Impact: A Handbook of Computational Methods and Models for Anticipating Economic, Social, Political and Security Effects in International Interventions. New York: Springer.
Krekel, Bryan (2009)Capability of the People’s Republic of China to Conduct Cyber Warfare and Computer Network Exploitation. McLean VA: Northrop Grumman Corporation.
Laran, Juliano, Amy N. Dalton, & Eduardo B. Andrade (2011) “The Curious Case of Behavioral Backlash: Why Brands Produce Priming Effects and Slogans Produce Reverse Priming Effects,”Journal of Consumer Research, v. 37, April 2011.
Macdonald, Scot (2007)Propaganda and Information Warfare in the Twenty-first Century: Altered Images and Deception Operations. New York: Routledge.
McNair, Philip A. (1991)Counterdeception and the Operational Commander. Newport, RI: Naval War College.
McPherson, Denver E. (2010) Deception Recognition: Rethinking the Operational Commander’s Approach. Newport RI: Joint Military Operations Department, Naval War College.
Murray, Williamson & Allan R. Millett (1996)Military Innovation in the Interwar Period. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Murray, Williamson & Allan R. Millett, (2000)A War To Be Won, Fighting the Second World War. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
National Intelligence Council (2000)Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future with Nongovernment Experts. Washington, DC: National Intelligence Council, NIC 2000–02, December 2000.
Pérez, Carlos M. (2004)Anatomy of a Rescue: What Makes Hostage Rescue Operations Successful? Thesis, Naval Postgraduate School: Monterey, CA, September 2004.
Rosen, Stephen Peter (1991)Winning the Next War: Innovation and the Modern Military. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Rowe, N. C. (2003) “Counterplanning Deceptions To Foil Cyber-Attack Plans,”Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance, West Point NY: United States Military Academy, June 2003.
Rowe, N. C. (2004) “A model of deception during cyber-attacks on information systems,”2004 IEEE First Symposium on Multi-Agent Security and Survivability, 30–31 Aug. 2004, pp. 21–30.
Rowe, N. C. (2006) “A Taxonomy of Deception in Cyberspace,”International Conference on Information Warfare and Security, Princess Anne, MD.
David E. Sanger (2012)Confront and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power. Crown: New York.
Scales, Jr., Robert H. (2000)Future Warfare: Anthology, Revised Edition. Carlisle Barracks PA: U.S. Army War College.
Stech, F., and C. Elsässer (2007) “Midway RevisitedStokes, Mark A., Jenny: Detecting Deception by Analysis of Competing Hypothesis,”Military Operations Research. 11/2007; v. 12, n. 1, pp. 35–55.
Whaley, Barton (2006)Detecting Deception: A Bibliography of Counterdeception Across Time, Cultures, and Disciplines, 2nd Ed. Washington, DC: Foreign Denial & Deception Committee, March 2006.
Whaley, B. (2007a).The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Magic 1584–2007. Lybrary.com.
Whaley, B. (2007b).Stratagem: Deception and Surprise in War. Norwood, MA: Artech House.
Whaley, B. (2007c). Toward a General Theory of Deception. In J. Gooch & A. Perlmutter, eds.Military Deception and Strategic Surprise. New York: Routlege.
Whaley, B. (2007d).Textbook of Political-Military Counterdeception: Basic Principles & Methods. Washington, DC: Foreign Denial & Deception Committee, August 2007.
Whaley, B. (2007e).The Prevalence of Guile: Deception Through Time and Across Cultures. Washington DC: Foreign Denial & Deception Committee, August 2007.
Whaley, B. (2007f) "The One Percent Solution: Costs and Benefits of Military Deception," in Arquilla, John & Douglas A. Borer, eds. (2007)Information Strategy and Warfare: A Guide to Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge.
Whaley, B. (2012).The Beginner’s Guide to Detecting Deception: Essay Series #1. Foreign Denial & Deception Committee, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Washington, DC. Unpublished manuscript.
Whaley, Barton, & Jeff Busby (2002) “Detecting Deception: Practice, Practitioners, and Theory,” in Godson, R., and J. Wirtz eds. (2002)Strategic Denial and Deception: The Twenty-First Century Challenge, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Wheaton, Kristan J. (2011) “Teaching Strategic Intelligence Through Games,”International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 24:2, 367–382.
Woolley, A. W. (2009)“Which Side Are You On? How Offensive and Defensive Strategic Orientation Impact Task Focus and Information Search in Teams,” Working Paper 548, May 2009, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business: Pittsburgh PA.http://​repository.​cmu.​edu/​tepper/​548.
Woolley, A. W. (2011) “Playing Offense vs. Defense: The Effects of Team Strategic Orientation on Team Process in Competitive Environments,”Organizational Science, v.22,n.6, Nov-Dec 2011, pp. 1384–1398.
Yetiv, S. (2013)National Security Through a Cockeyed Lens: How Cognitive Bias Impacts U.S. Foreign Policy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Yuill, Jim, Dorothy Denning, & Fred Feer (2006) “Using Deception to Hide Things from Hackers: Processes, Principles, and Techniques,”Journal of Information Warfare. 5,3: pp. 26–40.
Metadaten
Titel
Cyber Counterdeception: How to Detect Denial & Deception (D&D)
verfasst von
Dr. Kristin E. Heckman
Dr. Frank J. Stech
Copyright-Jahr
2015
Buch
Cyber Warfare

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-14038-4

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-14039-1

Copyright-Jahr: 2015

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14039-1_6