IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v96y2011i12p1647-1656.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is it wise to protect false targets?

Author

Listed:
  • Levitin, Gregory
  • Hausken, Kjell

Abstract

The paper considers a system consisting of genuine elements and false targets that cannot be distinguished by the attacker's observation. The false targets can be destroyed with much less effort than the genuine elements. We show that even when an attacker cannot distinguish between the genuine elements and the false targets, in many cases it can enhance the attack efficiency using a double attack strategy in which it tries first to eliminate with minimal effort as many false targets as possible in the first attack and then distributes its entire remaining resource among all surviving targets in the second attack. The model for evaluating the system vulnerability in the double attack is suggested for a single genuine element, and multiple genuine elements configured in parallel or in series. This model assumes that in both attacks the attacking resource is distributed evenly among the attacked targets. The defender can optimize its limited resource distribution between deploying more false targets and protecting them better. The attacker can optimize its limited resource distribution between two attacks. The defense strategy is analyzed based on a two period minmax game. A numerical procedure is suggested that allows the defender to find the optimal resource distribution between deploying and protecting the false targets. The methodology of optimal attack and defense strategies analysis is demonstrated. It is shown that protecting the false targets may reduce the efficiency of the double attack strategy and make this strategy ineffective in situations with low contest intensity and few false targets.

Suggested Citation

  • Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2011. "Is it wise to protect false targets?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(12), pages 1647-1656.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:96:y:2011:i:12:p:1647-1656
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.07.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832011001670
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2011.07.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "False targets vs. redundancy in homogeneous parallel systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 588-595.
    2. Gregory Levitin & Kjell Hausken, 2009. "Intelligence and Impact Contests in Systems with Fake Targets," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 157-173, June.
    3. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "False targets efficiency in defense strategy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 155-162, April.
    4. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Protection vs. false targets in series systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(5), pages 973-981.
    5. Kjell Hausken, 2005. "Production and Conflict Models Versus Rent-Seeking Models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 59-93, April.
    6. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "Intelligence and impact contests in systems with redundancy, false targets, and partial protection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(12), pages 1927-1941.
    7. Stergios Skaperdas, 1996. "Contest success functions (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 283-290.
    8. Peng, R. & Levitin, G. & Xie, M. & Ng, S.H., 2010. "Defending simple series and parallel systems with imperfect false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(6), pages 679-688.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bose, Gautam & Konrad, Kai A., 2020. "Devil take the hindmost: Deflecting attacks to other defenders," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    2. Lin, Chen & Xiao, Hui & Kou, Gang & Peng, Rui, 2020. "Defending a series system with individual protection, overarching protection, and disinformation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    3. Xiao, Hui & Shi, Daimin & Ding, Yi & Peng, Rui, 2016. "Optimal loading and protection of multi-state systems considering performance sharing mechanism," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 88-95.
    4. Qingqing Zhai & Rui Peng & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Defender–Attacker Games with Asymmetric Player Utilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 408-420, February.
    5. Peng, Rui & Xiao, Hui & Guo, Jianjun & Lin, Chen, 2020. "Defending a parallel system against a strategic attacker with redundancy, protection and disinformation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    6. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2013. "Is it wise to leave some false targets unprotected?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 176-186.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peng, Rui & Xiao, Hui & Guo, Jianjun & Lin, Chen, 2020. "Defending a parallel system against a strategic attacker with redundancy, protection and disinformation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2013. "Is it wise to leave some false targets unprotected?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 176-186.
    3. Peng, R. & Zhai, Q.Q. & Levitin, G., 2016. "Defending a single object against an attacker trying to detect a subset of false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 137-147.
    4. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2012. "Strategic Defense And Attack For Series And Parallel Reliability Systems: Comment," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5), pages 507-515, October.
    5. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "Intelligence and impact contests in systems with redundancy, false targets, and partial protection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(12), pages 1927-1941.
    6. Zhang, Xiaoxiong & Ding, Song & Ge, Bingfeng & Xia, Boyuan & Pedrycz, Witold, 2021. "Resource allocation among multiple targets for a defender-attacker game with false targets consideration," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    7. Ramirez-Marquez, Jose E. & Rocco S, Claudio M. & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Optimal protection of general source–sink networks via evolutionary techniques," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(10), pages 1676-1684.
    8. Peng, R. & Levitin, G. & Xie, M. & Ng, S.H., 2010. "Defending simple series and parallel systems with imperfect false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(6), pages 679-688.
    9. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2010. "Influence of attacker's target recognition ability on defense strategy in homogeneous parallel systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(5), pages 565-572.
    10. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Protection vs. false targets in series systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(5), pages 973-981.
    11. Chen, Shun & Zhao, Xudong & Chen, Zhilong & Hou, Benwei & Wu, Yipeng, 2022. "A game-theoretic method to optimize allocation of defensive resource to protect urban water treatment plants against physical attacks," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    12. Wu, Di & Xiao, Hui & Peng, Rui, 2018. "Object defense with preventive strike and false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 76-80.
    13. Ye, Zhi-Sheng & Peng, Rui & Wang, Wenbin, 2017. "Defense and attack of performance-sharing common bus systemsAuthor-Name: Zhai, Qingqing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 962-975.
    14. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2010. "Separation in homogeneous systems with independent identical elements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 625-634, June.
    15. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Paul, Jomon A., 2021. "National security vs. human rights: A game theoretic analysis of the tension between these objectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 790-805.
    16. Frank Yeong-Sung Lin & Yu-Shun Wang & Ming-Yang Huang, 2013. "Effective Proactive and Reactive Defense Strategies against Malicious Attacks in a Virtualized Honeynet," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-11, August.
    17. G Levitin & K Hausken, 2010. "Defence and attack of systems with variable attacker system structure detection probability," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(1), pages 124-133, January.
    18. R Peng & G Levitin & M Xie & S H Ng, 2011. "Optimal defence of single object with imperfect false targets," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(1), pages 134-141, January.
    19. Chen, Die & Xu, Maochao & Shi, Weidong, 2018. "Defending a cyber system with early warning mechanism," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 224-234.
    20. Bricha, Naji & Nourelfath, Mustapha, 2013. "Critical supply network protection against intentional attacks: A game-theoretical model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-10.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:96:y:2011:i:12:p:1647-1656. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.