A Case Study in Security

KEY POINTS:

 The BDCS project combines identity checking, biometric site access control and mobile biometric capabilities; with HRS responsible for working with global biometric partners, L1, to integrate a number of additional key functions within the mobile platform.

 The system identifies individuals as they enter UK Controlled Bases and provides confirmation of identity via multi-modal biometric enrolment and search capabilities. Individuals enroll both iris’, 10 fingerprints, facial image and biographic data.

 Viewed by the MoD as essential to help secure and control access to military facilities in the field; BDCS is currently operational across a number military sites, and provides an integral mobile biometric capability that can be scaled to meet requirements.

 BDCS is the second successful project delivered by HRS to the MoD. In 2006, HRS worked with Steria to deliver a Biometric Identity Verification (BIV) project which provided the foundations for the BDCS program.

“This was a highly complex and challenging project to deliver. HRS were involved from the early design stages, through development to delivery. HRS took a pragmatic approach to really understand the users and their environment, ensuring the delivered system met the requirements and all functionality.” – Tim Lammers, Biometrics Project Manager for the MoD
____________________________________________

Assessment Criteria:

General guidance

Quality of ideas, evidence of literature review, demonstration of up to date knowledge, together with appropriate comprehensive referencing is of more importance than the precise length of submission. The ability to critically analyse a case-study and /or setting and ability to apply knowledge so as to identify solutions to potential problem is essential. Length of submission should be between 1500 and 2000 words.

READ ALSO :   US Healthcare System

Further Guidance: [100 marks available/pass mark = 40]

The dangers of getting the balance right as between security, easy access and reduction of risk in demanding military contexts of use are to be the main focus of your response to the following tasks. All arguments presented are expected to be supported by evidence. You should answer each question in the order given below. Full citations (referencing) are needed for any information sources you identify.
a) Steria states a significant cost savings of a dedicated biometric solution over traditional password administration for the MoD case. One feasible solution might be the combination of PKI with biometrics for a set of security systems within MoD. Critically discuss benefits and limitations of such an approach to encrypt and digitally sign network traffic in that particular context.

[40 marks]

b) Give a full rational behind the alternatives to biometric templates MoD can use. What are the limitations and risks of template(s) usage in that particular case? Fully discuss their suitability and any inherent dangers or other weaknesses applied.
[30 marks]

c) Discuss the optimal means of protection at the end-user level (PC) that Steria can employ as part of the security policy imposed. Critically present your findings and give full arguments on their suitability in that particular scenario.

[30 marks]

MARKING GRID

A70-100% Outstanding/Excellent quality of ideas arguments. Very good grasp of technical aspects such as cryptographic methods, passwords and biometric techniques. Fully referenced submission. Clear and consistent demonstration of ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case-study.

READ ALSO :   for katetuter

B60-69% Very good grasp of arguments and cryptographic methods, passwords
and biometrics. Well referenced submission. Consistent demonstration
of ability to relate to the specifics of the case-study.

C 50-59% Adequate grasp of arguments. Well referenced submission. Clear demonstration of ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case-study.

D40-49% Barely adequate grasp of the arguments and weak but acceptable supportive evidence. Citations are adequate and some evidence of the ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case study.
Below 40% Failure to meet the standard as specified above
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!