Transnational Legal Compliance and International Standards

December 15, 2022

Transnational Legal Compliance and International Standards

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Transnational Legal Compliance and International Standards

Transnational, Legal, Compliance, International, Standards

Your team has been given the responsibility of conducting a baseline analysis for establishing a secure communications network for your assigned agency at the summit. The risk assessment process for a baseline analysis requires a multidisciplinary examination of the internal and external cyber environments.

The graded assignment for Project 1 is a Cybersecurity Policy and Baseline Analysis Report, which should be a minimum of 20 pages. There are 16 steps in this project and it should take about 17 days to complete.

This project is longer in duration than others in the course because some of the work you will complete also lays the foundation for work to be completed in Projects 2, 3, and 4. Begin with Step 1, where you will complete preparatory exercises designed to familiarize you with the tools and processes to be used throughout the project.

This is what I will be working on as a team member of this project: Step 14, 15, and 16.

Based on the policy matrix and the environmental review and analysis you developed in previous steps; the team should provide a two- to three-page Transnational Legal Compliance Report that itemizes all of the compliance requirements that are overlapping or similar among all the nations on the cyber security task force for the conference.

Include a short analysis on how these requirements are consistent (or not) with the Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to the Conduct of Cyber Operations.

In accordance with your team agreement, a designated team member will submit the Digital Forensic Environment Review and Analysis and the Transnational Legal Compliance Report to the drop box.

Then, proceed to the next step in the project to identify the critical or key international standards determined in previous steps.

Now that you have looked at the regulations used by the other nations, in this step you will consider international initiatives that foster cooperation with each other.

Among the items identified in the Transnational Legal Compliance Report and the policy matrix from the previous steps are certain international initiatives that each country has undertaken to demonstrate cooperation and compliance with other nations.

From the information you have gathered and what you have learned in previous courses, determine as a team which of these initiatives provides the best opportunity for cooperation among all the delegates at the conference.

Your team should develop a two- to three-page International Standards Report. Then, in accordance with your team agreement, a designated team member will submit the report for feedback. State your sources and support your recommendations with the facts that have been gathered.

As a team, you will work together to create a Cybersecurity Policy and Baseline Analysis Report. This report will address the current cyber disposition of legal standing for the Five Eyes (FVEY) country you represent regarding international cyber relations. This final report will be a minimum of 20 pages in length and meet APA standards for writing.

Refer to the Cybersecurity Policy and Baseline Analysis Report Instructions for further details of what to include and the general format of the report. After you have collaborated with your team, each team member should make revisions and submit an individual report, independent of the team. Submit your Cybersecurity Policy and Baseline Analysis Report for assessment.

Five Eyes Alliance

The United States, in cooperation with the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand established an agreement known as the Five Eyes (FVEY) alliance under which these countries agree to both collect, analyze, and share signals intelligence (SIGINT) and not spy on each other as adversaries (Mansfield, 2017).

The members of FVEY use their technical capabilities to collect massive amounts of information on electronic communications world-wide, to target specific individuals and groups, and to retain information about other persons for extended periods of time. This data is collected at “Special Source Operations” (SSO) locations around the globe and stored in the Five Eyes nations’ databases (Parsons, 2015).

Signals intelligence surveillance plays a critical role in the United States’ cybersecurity and cyber-offense approaches. Its cybersecurity posture is dependent upon the ability to protect and defend communications networks from infiltration, manipulation, and exploitation by adversaries both foreign and domestic.

The use of deep packet inspection equipment throughout global networks allows the United States and the other FVEY members to collect metadata and content, and very intricate signals development operations enable access to, infiltration of, and modification of data on the networks of adversaries as part of their cyber-offensive strategies.

Once targets are identified, the SIGINT agencies can then identify groups and their relationships with the adversary under surveillance through the development of communications association graphs. Data collected are analyzed and filtered to examine information that may assist in a specific SIGINT operation. This data can then be used to further target specific individuals and to exploit and manipulate their devices, systems, and/or networks (Parsons, 2015).

One of the more difficult aspects of the FYVE relationship is that of the sharing of intelligence data. Disclosure of the intelligence data isn’t as much of a concern as inadvertent or unauthorized disclosures that put methods, sources, and platforms for intelligence collection at risk.

While military commanders have long pushed for a common interface for actionable intelligence that can be using in operations planning, intelligence and political leaders have resisted the broadening of intelligence sharing databases due to concerns about endangering their individual nations’ assets (Erwin, 2015).

References

Erwin, S. (2015, September). U.S. Central Command leads push to connect allies in common network. National Defense, C(742), 20-21. (Accession no. 109203109).

Mansfield, H. (2017, April 1). Using VPNs to protect your Internet privacy. Retrieved from https://haroldmansfield.com/using-a-vpn-to-protect…

Parsons, C. (2015, 23 March). Beyond privacy: Articulating the broader harms of pervasive mass surveillance. Media and Communications, 3(3), 1-11. Retrieved from http://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunicatio…

RESOURCES

UK Perspective

Australian Perspective

New Zealand Perspective

US Perspective

Canadian Perspective

[Order Now]

Transnational Legal Compliance and International Standards

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.