Search results

Several attack models attempt to describe behaviours of attacks with the intent to understand and combat them better. However, all models are to some degree incomplete. They may lack insight about minor variations about attacks that are observed in the real world (but are not described in the model). This may lead to similar attacks being classified as the same type of attack, or in some cases the same instance of attack. The appropriate solution would be to modify the model or replace it entirely. However, doing so may be undesirable as the model may work well for most cases or time and resource constraints may factor in as well. This paper aims to explore the potential value of adding information about attacks and attackers to existing models.

This paper investigates used cases of minor variations in attacks and how it may and may not be appropriate to communicate subtle differences in existing attack models through the use of annotations. In particular, the authors investigate commonalities across a range of existing models and identify where and how annotations may be helpful.

The authors propose that nuances (of attack properties) can be appended as annotations to existing attack models. Using annotations appropriately should enable analysts and researchers to express subtle but important variations in attacks that may not fit the model currently being used.

This work only demonstrated a few simple, generic examples. In the future, the authors intend to investigate how this annotation approach can be extended further. Particularly, they intend to explore how annotations can be created computationally; the authors wish to obtain feedback from security analysts through interviews, identify where potential biases may arise and identify other real-world applications.

The value of this paper is that the authors demonstrate how annotations may help analysts communicate and ask better questions during identification of unknown aspects of attacks faster,e.g. as a means of storing mental notes in a structured manner, especially while facing zero-day attacks when information is incomplete.

On February 7 at Hatfield, Mr. John Dent, the British Civil Aviation Authority Chairman, handed over to Mr. Michael Goldsmith, British Aerospace Hatfield‐Chester Divisional Managing Director, a British Civil Aviation Authority Type Certificate of Airworthiness for the BAe 146.

The system of critical infrastructure in the United States is vast in size and geographic layout. These two factors along with the American system of Federalism impose great challenges in protecting these systems. Much of the physical protection of these assets is left to state and local governments making protection more difficult is that a large number of these critical infrastructures are owned by multinational corporations. It is through a complex coordinated effort spanning across all three levels of government that these systems are kept secure in the United States.

Perhaps the most remarkable event in the US medical market in the last ten years has been the astonishing growth of the new kinds of health‐care delivery systems that are collectively known as health maintenance organisations (HMOs). Indeed, they are now posing a serious threat to the conventional insurance sector which has traditionally covered most Americans. According to data collected by the US Department of Health and Human Services and the Minnesota research foundation, InterStudy, some 18.9 million people were enrolled in an HMO in June 1985, so that the 400 HMOs then in existence accounted for roughly nine per cent of the health‐care market. Today's figures are undoubtedly higher, and one New York investment company expects that ‘by 1990, 75 million people, or 30 per cent of the population, will be members of HMOs’, with the organisations achieving ‘membership expansion and revenue growth of 30–40 per cent a year’

This chapter looks at what it means to set out to do anthropological research with tangata whenua (New Zealanders of Māori descent; literally, ‘people of the land’), from the particular perspective of a Pākehā (New Zealander of non-Māori descent – usually European) musical anthropologist with an interest in sound-made worlds. In late 2017, Lowe was awarded funding for a conjoint PhD scholarship in anthropology at James Cook University, Australia, and Aarhus University, Denmark. However, following advice from several colleagues in Aotearoa New Zealand, Lowe decided to assess the viability of the project with his prospective Māori and non-Māori collaborators prior to officially starting his PhD candidature. Throughout this process of pre-ethics (Barrett, 2016), Lowe met with both Māori and non-Māori to discuss the proposed PhD project; a ‘listening in’ to his own socio-historical positioning as a Pākehā anthropologist within contemporary Aotearoa New Zealand. This approach to anthropological research is in response to George (2017), who argues for a new politically and ethnically aware mode of anthropology that aims to (re)establish relationships of true meaning between anthropology and Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand.

The paper examines the role of employees in governance. The paper highlights from a theory basis that employee and shareholder utilities can be coincident. However, it shows that corporate practice with respect to employee involvement in governance and decision‐making is diverse. The paper draws out the contrast in approaches between the Anglo‐American and the German approach to employees by detailing differences in employee power, career patterns, ownership patterns and legal obligations. These lead to enactment of a different structural and cultural governance systems; which are encapsulated in the unitary board structure of the UK and the two‐tier German approach. The strengths and limitations of the unitary board and two‐tier boards are highlighted, and the case for convergence examined.

This paper aims to contribute to this special issue on interpretivist research methodologies and the phygital consumerist landscape by exploring some underlying issues within the specific context of luxury consumption. The paper starts with a critique of current research, drawing particular attention to problems of reductionism, poor representativeness and weak contextualisation in research that adopts a positivist epistemology. The paper then highlights some of the contributions that interpretivist scholarship is making, and can potentially make, to our understanding of the experiential and humanistic aspects of luxury consumption, presented in a nuanced, discursive and deeply contextualised manner.

This commentary is informed by an in-depth examination of the methodology and approach adopted in the 327 most-recently published academic articles on luxury (from late-2021).

This opinion piece suggests the need for a sea-change in the way that scholars approach luxury research in online, offline and hybrid phygital settings to capture and convey its true complexity, diversity, contingency and contextuality and its emotional and symbolic character, and to help ensure that it delivers findings that are of relevance and value to luxury industry practitioners.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to look comprehensively and critically at the methodological approaches adopted by academics writing in the field of luxury consumption.

The current work reviews all retailing articles published in four prominent retailing journals – Journal of Retailing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, and International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research – in the 2009-2015 period, picking up where Runyan and Hyun (2009) left off. The purpose of this paper is to identify leading authors and institutions in retailing research based on overall impact.

Content analysis/literature review/descriptive research.

In total, 1,392 articles were published during this time period, and through a procedure of weights and adjustments for author count, journal impact, journal quality, and journal publishing opportunity, the findings reveal that research collaboration is highly prevalent, as evidenced by the high number of multi-authored papers and cross-university/international partnerships. Additionally, some authors and institutions remain influential, while others have emerged as highly influential in the last seven years. This shows the dynamic nature of the field and the need to remain active in quality publishing.

Scholars must understand that several factors influence impact judgments, which cannot be assessed using raw counts alone. Journal quality, impact, and publishing opportunity as well as author counts are important elements to consider.

These reviews are vital to the field in that they provide status updates on scholarship, so these reviews should be done periodically. Additionally, the findings in this paper provide a more holistic understanding of research impact and permit better assessment for scholars and administrators.