Scenario
You are employed as a cybersecurity analyst at NCU-FSB, a financial organization that has invested in
establishing a security program but is in the process of developing a risk management strategy. This means
that there is a critical need for implementing risk reduction strategies to prevent intrusions or attacks, like
monitoring and response strategies, security awareness, training, and systems administration tools. In the
second month of working for the organization, a user received a phishing email from a foreign country. After
opening and reading the email, the userâs computer was compromised. Using ARP caching, the attacker was
able to sniff password hashes and crack them, which escalated to spear-phishing and whaling attacks (domino
effect). The attack or intrusions have been there for months, making it an Advanced Persistent Threat (APT)
related attack. ARP stands for address resolution protocol, used to connect layer 2 of the OSI model, data link
layer with layer 3 of the OSI model, network.
Sample Solution
participant must guess better than 1 out of 5. For this experiment to give more concrete evidence of clairvoyance a large sample size for the participant to guess from would be necessary as this would create a larger difference between chance and clairvoyance making the data much more concise. There was also a sort of âlearning curveâ with the participants whenever the testing setup was changed. When first trying the new testing setup the participant would perform very poorly, improving over time until plateauing just over chance probability. This improvement over time shows that there may have been something about how they were being tested that can be learned or practiced knowing how to âguessâ better, but only to a certain extent. If it were truly down to clairvoyance, then the results should be the same regardless of how the test were administered. Another flaw with how the tests were administered is how many trials were performed. While a few thousand tests may seem like a lot, a few years later another set of tests were performed with a much larger sample size of over 100,000. Samuel Soal aimed to perform similar tests to the ones performed by J.B. Rhine as addressed in the previous paragraph. In the 1930s, he tried his best to replicate the results that were achieved with little success. He used the same set of 25 Zener cards and had 160 subjects perform the tests over several years. In the end he had recorded 128,350 guesses. The average that the card was guessed correctly was between 5 and 5.001, what was to be expected purely by chance. This sample size dwarfed that of Rhine and showed results that were in line with the expectations of our understanding of probability. Soalâs results completely disproved the results that Rhine had collected and published, and he was known in the scientific community as being one of Rhineâs biggest critics. However, Soalâs later work did not hold as much merit as his initial experiments.>
participant must guess better than 1 out of 5. For this experiment to give more concrete evidence of clairvoyance a large sample size for the participant to guess from would be necessary as this would create a larger difference between chance and clairvoyance making the data much more concise. There was also a sort of âlearning curveâ with the participants whenever the testing setup was changed. When first trying the new testing setup the participant would perform very poorly, improving over time until plateauing just over chance probability. This improvement over time shows that there may have been something about how they were being tested that can be learned or practiced knowing how to âguessâ better, but only to a certain extent. If it were truly down to clairvoyance, then the results should be the same regardless of how the test were administered. Another flaw with how the tests were administered is how many trials were performed. While a few thousand tests may seem like a lot, a few years later another set of tests were performed with a much larger sample size of over 100,000. Samuel Soal aimed to perform similar tests to the ones performed by J.B. Rhine as addressed in the previous paragraph. In the 1930s, he tried his best to replicate the results that were achieved with little success. He used the same set of 25 Zener cards and had 160 subjects perform the tests over several years. In the end he had recorded 128,350 guesses. The average that the card was guessed correctly was between 5 and 5.001, what was to be expected purely by chance. This sample size dwarfed that of Rhine and showed results that were in line with the expectations of our understanding of probability. Soalâs results completely disproved the results that Rhine had collected and published, and he was known in the scientific community as being one of Rhineâs biggest critics. However, Soalâs later work did not hold as much merit as his initial experiments.>
