Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Describe the company network, interconnection, and communication environment.
Weight: 15%
Did not submit or incompletely described the company network, interconnection, and communication environment.
Partially described the company network, interconnection, and communication environment.
Satisfactorily described the company network, interconnection, and communication environment.
Thoroughly described the company network, interconnection, and communication environment.
2a. Defend your assumptions where pertinent information from the scenario isn’t available.
Weight: 5%
Did not submit or incompletely defended your assumptions where pertinent information from the scenario isn’t available.
Partially defended your assumptions where pertinent information from the scenario isn’t available.
Satisfactorily defended your assumptions where pertinent information from the scenario isn’t available.
Thoroughly defended your assumptions where pertinent information from the scenario isn’t available.
2b. Ascertain apparent security vulnerabilities, and analyze at least three (3) such vulnerabilities. Such analysis should entertain the possibility of faulty network design. Recommend mitigation processes and procedures for each of the identified vulnerabilities.
Weight: 5%
Did not submit or incompletely ascertained apparent security vulnerabilities; did not submit or incompletely analyzed at least three (3) such vulnerabilities. Did not submit or incompletely entertained the possibility of faulty network design. Did not submit or incompletely recommended mitigation processes and procedures for each of the identified vulnerabilities.
Partially ascertained apparent security vulnerabilities; partially analyzed at least three (3) such vulnerabilities. Partially entertained the possibility of faulty network design. Partially recommended mitigation processes and procedures for each of the identified vulnerabilities.
Satisfactorily ascertained apparent security vulnerabilities; satisfactorily analyzed at least three (3) such vulnerabilities Satisfactorily entertained the possibility of faulty network design. Satisfactorily recommended mitigation processes and procedures for each of the identified vulnerabilities.
Thoroughly ascertained apparent security vulnerabilities; thoroughly analyzed at least three (3) such vulnerabilities. Thoroughly entertained the possibility of faulty network design. Thoroughly recommended mitigation processes and procedures for each of the identified vulnerabilities.
2c. Justify your cryptography recommendations, based on security concerns and requirements, data-driven decision-making, and objective opinions.
Weight: 5%
Did not submit or incompletely justified your cryptography recommendations, based on security concerns and requirements, data-driven decision making, and objective opinions.
Partially justified your cryptography recommendations, based on security concerns and requirements, data-driven decision-making, and objective opinions.
Satisfactorily justified your cryptography recommendations, based on security concerns and requirements, data-driven decision-making, and objective opinions.
Thoroughly justified your cryptography recommendations, based on security concerns and requirements, data-driven decision-making, and objective opinions.
3. Examine whether your risk assessment methodology is quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of these, and discuss the main reasons why you believe that the methodology that you utilized was the most appropriate.
Weight: 20%
Did not submit or incompletely examined whether your risk assessment methodology is quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of these; did not submit or incompletely discussed the main reasons why you believe that the methodology that you utilized was the most appropriate.
Partially examined whether your risk assessment methodology is quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of these; partially discussed the main reasons why you believe that the methodology that you utilized was the most appropriate.
Satisfactorily examined whether your risk assessment methodology is quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of these; satisfactorily discussed the main reasons why you believe that the methodology that you utilized was the most appropriate.
Thoroughly examined whether your risk assessment methodology is quantitative, qualitative, or a combination of these; thoroughly discussed the main reasons why you believe that the methodology that you utilized was the most appropriate.
4. Explain the way in which you would present your findings and assessment to the company’s management and thus facilitate security buy-in and concentration.
Weight: 15%
Did not submit or incompletely explained the way in which you would present your findings and assessment to the company’s management and thus facilitate security buy-in and concentration.
Partially explained the way in which you would present your findings and assessment to the company’s management and thus facilitate security buy-in and concentration.
Satisfactorily explained the way in which you would present your findings and assessment to the company’s management and thus facilitate security buy-in and concentration.
Thoroughly explained the way in which you would present your findings and assessment to the company’s management and thus facilitate security buy-in and concentration.
5. Using Microsoft Visio or its open source equivalent, redraw the CFI diagram, depicted as a secure and risk-mitigating model.
Weight: 20%
Did not submit or incompletely redrew the CFI diagram, depicted as a secure and risk-mitigating model, using Microsoft Visio or its open source equivalent.
Partially redrew the CFI diagram, depicted as a secure and risk-mitigating model, using Microsoft Visio or its open source equivalent.
Satisfactorily redrew the CFI diagram, depicted as a secure and risk-mitigating model, using Microsoft Visio or its open source equivalent.
Thoroughly redrew the CFI diagram, depicted as a secure and risk-mitigating model, using Microsoft Visio or its open source equivalent.
6. 3 references
Weight: 5%
No references provided
Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%
More than 6 errors present
5-6 errors present
3-4 errors present
0-2 errors present
Jrasue
rubic_10.docx
0
