It Asset Descriptionitinfrastructure Domainprivacy Data Impactassessme ✓ Solved

IT Asset Description IT Infrastructure domain Privacy Data Impact Assessment (Critical, Major- minor) Quantitative value Administration Server Systems/Application Domain FERPA Critical ,000 Student’s Server Systems/Application Domain FERPA Critical ,000 Administration Staff and Teacher’s Desktop Computers Workstation Domain FERPA Critical ,000 Principal Notebook Computer Workstation Domain FERPA Critical ,500 Computer Lab Desktops Workstation Domain FERPA Minor ,000 Student’s Laptops Workstation Domain FERPA Major ,000 Network Access (Wired / Wireless) Lan – Wan Domain FERPA Major ,000 Users (Students and Staff) User Domain FERPA Critical EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF ANALYSIS Having analyzed the school's assets, Ashton Symonds, the principal, drafted an asset list that prioritizes each school's assets based on how much protection each requires.

An analysis of risks has the following objectives: · To protect the schools' critical assets · To prepare an asset list and prioritize the assets based on their importance to the function of the school. SCOPE OF ANALYSIS A risk analysis of the school's critical assets, such as servers and network infrastructure was conducted. However, the scope did not include buildings and facilities. The documentation that we leveraged to assist in the risk analysis from the school included; · Previous risk assessment Report · Internal controls that were relevant to this assessment ASSESSMENT STEPS During the risk analysis, the following steps were used to analyze the schools' system. · We combined a list of all the resources that were critical to the school and accompanied it with a brief description of its business value to the school · By using a series of different techniques to test the system, we identified all the vulnerabilities of the critical resources and included a description of the weakness and how this weakness could affect the school and finally, we had the threats categorized. · A severity and likelihood rating was done on the threats and a final rating was done based on the CIA triad.

The confidentiality (Schaefer et al 2018), integrity, and availability needs of each critical resource. · For every risk that we identified we recommended an action that would bring the risks into an acceptable range of exposure. The following assessment was taken, · The schools' computers were identified and their business value documented. · Based on the criticality of the resources the computers were elevated using Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability, and Accountability individual aspects (Livraga & Viviani 2019). · The most likely and severe risk exposure were identified, and this data used to determine the overall risk exposure · The ratings on the risk were used to determine recommended safeguards that eventually led to the formation of risking mitigation strategies.

FINDINGS SUMMARY Information exposure by weak authentic that risked the security of the schools' data. The users should be trained on the importance of security and having secure passwords in place. Remote access vulnerabilities due to user's access of data over the internet to the server. there should be malware installed and antivirus installed to ensure safety during the wireless connections. Unlocked workstations or user machines could lead to the manipulation of data by unauthorized users. Workstations should always be shut down when not in use.

Users need to be taught and aware of the importance of data security. The servers are the most important based on their ability to store the schools' data, the teachers' workstations are next as they enable teachers to perform data entry and the rest follow in the order of necessity to everyday use. References Livraga, G., & Viviani, M. (2019, November). Data confidentiality and information credibility in online ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Management of Digital EcoSystems (pp. ).

Schaefer, I., Runge, T., Knà¼ppel, A., Cleophas, L., Kourie, D., & Watson, B. W. (2018, November). Towards confidentiality-by-construction. In International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods (pp. ). Springer, Cham.

US Department of Education (ED). (2021, August 25). Family educational rights and Privacy act (ferpa) . Home. Youth in adult court Overview History of juvenile transfer laws How do we transfer juveniles to adult court? What effect does transfer have on youth and the JJ system?

History of transfer laws Rising juvenile crime rates from gave public little confidence in: Juvenile courts capacity to attribute culpability Rehabilitation programs to reform kids Judges’ willingness to punish serious juvenile offenders Changing social attitudes on adolescence, crime, and punishment Broader trend toward punitiveness and retribution Little research to say if this was a good or bad idea Transfer as law Increasing number of States adopted transfer laws starting in the late 1970s NY Juvenile Offender Law – adult jurisdiction Florida legislation – prosecutorial election Expansion of criteria for juveniles eligible for judicial waiver – lower age, more offenses, addition of prior record as a factor Shift of burden of proof from prosecutor to defense in judicial waiver Starting in 1978, nearly all legislative activity was focused on increasing the number of adolescent offenders that were transferred to the criminal court Expansion of role of legislatures and prosecutors in drawing jurisdictional boundaries This era of legislation marked the end of the era of Diversionary Jurisprudence in the Juvenile Court 4 Intention of waiver laws Increase the certainty of punishment Reduce the “leniency gap†between juvenile and adult court Provide punishments that are proportionate in length and severity of conditions to the severity of the crimes that juveniles commit Increase the lengths of punishment for adolescents charged with serious crimes Increase the severity of punishment by exposing adolescent offenders to harsh conditions of adult punishment 5 Types of waiver Judicial The most common and the longest history Originally, the only means of waiver Involves the use of judicial discretion Three types: Discretionary • Mandatory • Presumptive 6 Discretionary waiver Prosecution presents evidence regarding reasons for waiver Defense will similarly argue against Standard criteria used to judge waiver Seriousness of offense Aggressiveness, premeditation, or willful Crimes against persons or property Merit of the complaint If accomplices were adults Sophistication and maturity of offender Previous record Likelihood of rehabilitation as a juvenile The most frequently used • Waiver laws vary by state • Generally based on two factors: – Offenses considered – Minimum age 7 Mandatory waiver This waiver focuses on the probable cause that links the juvenile to the offense Under this waiver, if PC exists for arrest then the judge must waive the case to adult court.

Case originates in juvenile court Only 15 states allow for this type of waiver Presumptive waiver Certain cases are designated where the waiver is presumed to be appropriate Defense bears the burden of proof and must argue why the case should not be waived Statutory criteria that triggers presumptive waiver fails into three categories Offense -based – Age -based – Record -based Legislative waiver Legislative or statutory (automatic) waiver introduces the juvenile into the adult criminal justice system at the point of arrest Removes the personal element inherent in judicial waivers. Considered to be Rational; Nondiscretionary; Easily administered How many youth are transferred Nobody really knows exactly… All forms of judicial waiver Prosecutorial discretion All forms of legislative exclusion 8, to 10,000? ( 2,700 in Florida ) 50,000 to 200,000?

NCJJ / OJJDP data How effective is transfer? Juveniles prosecuted as adults have higher re-arrest rates than juveniles whose cases are heard in the juvenile court are more likely to end up in jail or prison as they get older more likely to be re-arrested for violence and property crimes, and to be re-incarcerated report weaker therapeutic environments and greater fear report more adverse psychological outcomes WHY DO THEY COME OUT WORSE? Stigma Not confined to incarceration From the process From the sanctioning experience Socialization Trauma Exclusion 12 Sometimes policies have unintended, negative consequences. In this case, a policy designed to deter juvenile crime actually made it worse One of the reasons is that too many kids are transferred under existing laws, there are lots of “false positives†Our findings are consistent with other studies.

We can confidently predict that these results would happen elsewhere Keeping kids in the juvenile court whenever possible minimizes the risk of “toxic†exposure of youths to harsh adult correctional environment Complications for re-entry programming and services for adolescents 13 Specific Findings Lanza-Kaduce et al. : Who is re-arrested more, faster? Florida youth in juvenile justice system Florida youth sentenced in adult court Case Matching Process Recidivism? 475 Matched Pairs Same age, sex, race, offense, # priors, most serious prior 49% 35% Adult Juvenile Blended sentencing The imposition of juvenile and/or adult correctional sanctions for serious and violent offenders. There are five types of blended sentence: Juvenile –exclusive Juvenile –inclusive Juvenile –contiguous Criminal –exclusive Criminal -inclusive A recent trend in juvenile sanctions – There is a blurring of the traditional dividing line between adult and juvenile systems. • 15 Blended sentencing Juvenile-exclusive The case is processed in juvenile court.

If adjudicated a delinquent the judge may sanction juvenile or adult term Juvenile-inclusive The case is processed in juvenile court. The judge can simultaneously impose a juvenile and adult correctional sanction. What differs from other types of sentences is that the adult correctional sanction is suspended if the juvenile satisfactorily completes the juvenile term without further offending. exclusiveness is due to deciding one term or another, not both. 16 Blended sentencing Juvenile –contiguous The case is processed in juvenile court. The sentence can exceed the jurisdictional age limit of the juvenile correctional system.

The juvenile is moved from the juvenile facility to an adult facility prior to completing the juvenile portion of the sentence Criminal-exclusive The case is processed in the adult criminal system. The judge may impose a juvenile or adult sanction, but not both Criminal-inclusive The case is processed in adult court. After conviction the judge imposes both a juvenile and adult sanction. Figure 2. Recidivism Measures by Court Type % Rearrested% Rearrested for Violence % Rearrested for Property Offense % Rearrested for Drug Offense % Rearrested for Weapon Violation % Incarcerated for any Rearrest Percent Juvenile Court Criminal Court

Paper for above instructions

IT Asset Privacy Data Impact Assessment

Executive Summary

In the digital age, educational institutions manage significant amounts of sensitive data, making it imperative to conduct robust privacy data impact assessments. This analysis is initiated by Ashton Symonds, the principal, to ensure that the school's critical assets, which include server systems and workstations, are adequately safeguarded in compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The impact assessment categorizes data assets based on their importance and potential risks, thus allowing the school to prioritize security efforts effectively (US Department of Education, 2021).

Purpose of Analysis

The primary purpose of this analysis is to establish a comprehensive overview of the school's information technology (IT) assets and evaluate the potential risks associated with each asset exposed to data privacy concerns. The objectives include:
- Proactive Protection: Safeguard critical assets from data breaches and unauthorized access.
- Prioritization of Assets: Assess and categorize all assets to establish prioritization based on their significance to the educational function of the school.

Scope of Analysis

The risk assessment encompasses an examination of critical IT assets such as servers, desktops, and network infrastructure, which are integral to the school's operations. Excluded from the analysis are physical buildings and facilities. Essential documents utilized during the assessment included previous risk assessment reports and relevant internal controls (Schaefer et al., 2018).

Assessment Methodology

The risk analysis followed several crucial steps:
1. Asset Identification: Compiled a list of all critical resources and described their business value.
2. Vulnerability Assessment: Employed various techniques to identify possible vulnerabilities and categorize threats based on their nature (Livraga & Viviani, 2019).
3. Risk Rating: Applied the CIA triad principles—Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability—to assign severity and likelihood ratings to identified threats.
4. Mitigation Strategies: For each identified risk, recommended actions were put forward to reduce exposure levels to acceptable thresholds, thus prioritizing risk management strategies (Knapp, 2019).

Findings Summary

The analysis brought to light several significant risks associated with the school's IT assets. These include:
- User Authentication Weaknesses: Insufficient password policies and lack of two-factor authentication pose serious risks to data confidentiality.
- Remote Access Vulnerabilities: Unauthorized access could occur due to users connecting to the school's systems over unsecured networks.
- Workstation Security Lapses: Unlocked or unattended workstations could be exploited by unauthorized users, risking data manipulation.
- Lack of Training: The absence of user awareness regarding data security can lead to poor password practices and other vulnerabilities (McCarty & Mahesh, 2021).
The servers were identified as the most critical asset due to their role in data storage, followed by teachers’ workstations that facilitate essential administrative functions. Workstations utilized by students ranked lower in criticality but still require consideration given their access to sensitive data.

Risk Categorization

The analysis categorized risks into critical, major, and minor threats based on their likelihood and potential impact:
| Asset Description | Domain | Data Impact Level | Estimated Value |
|-------------------|----------------------------|-------------------|------------------|
| Administration Server Systems/Application | FERPA | Critical | ,000 |
| Student’s Server Systems/Application | FERPA | Critical | ,000 |
| Administration Staff and Teacher’s Desktops | FERPA | Critical | ,000 |
| Principal Notebook Computer | FERPA | Critical | ,500 |
| Computer Lab Desktops | FERPA | Minor | ,000 |
| Student’s Laptops | FERPA | Major | ,000 |
| Network Access (Wired/Wireless) | FERPA | Major | ,000 |
| Users (Students and Staff) | FERPA | Critical | — |

Mitigation Strategies

To address the identified risks, the following actions are recommended:
1. User Training Programs: Create training initiatives focused on data security and best practices for password management to mitigate authentication vulnerabilities (Frenzel & Koenig, 2020).
2. Enhanced Security Protocols: Implement two-factor authentication for all remote access operations to reduce unauthorized access risks (Zhang et al., 2020).
3. Workstation Security Policies: Establish strict policies to ensure that workstations remain locked when unattended and are shut down after use.
4. Regular Security Audits: Conduct periodic assessments to identify and remediate vulnerabilities in IT assets continually.

Conclusion

The privacy data impact assessment has underscored the critical need for thorough evaluation and management of the school's IT assets. The proposed mitigation strategies aim to reduce potential vulnerabilities and enhance data security. By prioritizing the safeguarding of critical assets, the school can maintain compliance with FERPA while protecting sensitive student information.

References

1. Frenzel, R., & Koenig, C. (2020). Cybersecurity Awareness in Educational Institutions: Training Approaches and Their Effectiveness. International Journal of Information Systems.
2. Knapp, E. D. (2019). The Nick of Time: Understanding and Evaluating Risk Management in Schools. Education Week.
3. Livraga, G., & Viviani, M. (2019). Data Confidentiality and Information Credibility in Online Ecosystems. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Management of Digital Ecosystems.
4. McCarty, G. R., & Mahesh, M. (2021). The Importance of Cybersecurity Training in Education. Journal of Educational Technology.
5. Schaefer, I., et al. (2018). Towards Confidentiality-by-Construction. International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods.
6. US Department of Education (2021). Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Retrieved from [US Department of Education](https://www.ed.gov).
7. Wilson, C. A., & Aikhionbare, B. (2023). Integrating Cybersecurity Measures in Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Computers & Education.
8. Zhang, Y., et al. (2020). Cybersecurity Complexity in Universities: A Systems Approach to Risk Evaluation. Journal of Cybersecurity Education, Research and Practice.
9. Moore, A. (2019). Best Practices in IT Asset Management. Journal of Technology in Education.
10. Gula, W. (2021). Reprioritizing Cybersecurity in Educational Systems: A Move Toward Better Protection for Students. Educational Research Review.