Order Number |
636738393092 |
Type of Project |
ESSAY |
Writer Level |
PHD VERIFIED |
Format |
APA |
Academic Sources |
10 |
Page Count |
3-12 PAGES |
No directly quoted material may be used in this project paper.
Resources should be summarized or paraphrased with appropriate in-text and Resource page citations.
Scenario Characters:
You: Information Security Analyst, Provincial Worldwide
Ms. Carol McPherson: Information Security Director, Provincial Worldwide (Your supervisor)
Mr. Harold Newman: Human Resources Director, Provincial Worldwide
Mr. John Belcamp: (former) engineer, Product Development Division, Provincial Worldwide
Ms. Evelyn Bass: Product Engineering Manager; Product Development Division, Provincial Worldwide (John Belcamp’s Supervisor)
**Characters will carry through Project 1, 2 and the Final Project. However, please remain conscious of who you are/what roll you play in EACH project and in regards to specific questions.
For the purposes of this project, imagine you are a Corporate Security Analyst, an employee of Provincial Worldwide and assigned to the company’s Corporate Protection Team.
In this case, you have been notified by Mr. Newman, Human Resources Director for Provincial Worldwide, that the company has just terminated Mr. John Belcamp, a former engineer in the company’s New Products Division, for cause (consistent tardiness and absences from work).
Mr. Newman tells you that during Mr. Belcamp’s exit interview earlier that day, the terminated employee made several strange statements that seem to allude to a current program the company is working on.
Mr. Belcamp’s statements made Mr. Newman fear he might be taking Provincial’s intellectual property with him to his new employer (undoubtedly a competitor). In particular, Mr. Newman is worried about the loss of the source code for “Product X,” which the company is counting on to earn millions in revenue over the next several years.
Mr. Newman provides you a copy of the source code to use in your investigation. Lastly, Mr. Newman tells you to remember that the Company wants to retain the option to refer the investigation to law enforcement in the future, so anything you do should be with thought about later potential admissibility in court.
He tells you that in a conversation with other corporate executives that their understanding of the investigative technological issues and how they have anything to do with a person’s right as an employee seem a bit lacking; so, you will need to be detailed in any explanation.
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
While the Fourth Amendment is most commonly interpreted to only affect/restrict governmental power (e.g., law enforcement), the fact that a formal criminal investigation is a possibility (and the Company has no desire to be named in a civil lawsuit) means you must consider its effect to your actions.
With the above scenario in mind, thoroughly answer the following questions (in paragraph format, properly referring to and citing materials used in this course as well as outside research, where appropriate, and within a reference page at the end of the project paper).
Support your answers. (Please note that while cyber security and digital forensics have overlaps in incident response preparation, please limit your answers here to forensic readiness in the digital forensic arena, not cyber security.)
Can you or Ms. Bass search Mr. Belcamp’s assigned locker in the Company’s on-site gym for digital evidence, and why? Additionally, can you or Ms. Bass use a master key to search Mr. Belcamp’s locked desk for digital evidence, whether still on site, or after Mr. Belcamp has left the premises? Support your answer.
Screening is sometimes casual and usually consists of verification of an employee’s Company ID card. Can security staff at this checkpoint be directed to open Mr. Belcamp’s briefcase and seize any potential digital evidence, why or why not? Support your answer.
There is a space for the employee to acknowledge receipt of this notice. Mr. Belcamp has a copy of the handbook but never signed the receipt page. Does that matter; why or why not? Explain.
However, Mr. Newman or Ms. Bass have never heard of the term “chain of custody.” How would you explain what chain of custody means, why it is important, and what could occur if the chain of custody is not documented. Support your answer.
Project Requirements:
RUBRIC | |||
Excellent Quality
95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. |
Literature Support
91-84 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. |
Methodology
58-53 points With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached. |
Average Score
50-85% |
40-38 points
More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied. |
83-76 points
There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration. |
52-49 points
The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. |
Poor Quality
0-45% |
37-1 points
The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied. |
75-1 points
There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references. |
48-1 points
There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. |
Place the Order Here: https://standardwriter.com/orders/ordernow / https://standardwrit