IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v38y2018i2p215-225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives on Cybersecurity Information Sharing among Multiple Stakeholders Using a Decision‐Theoretic Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Meilin He
  • Laura Devine
  • Jun Zhuang

Abstract

The government, private sectors, and others users of the Internet are increasingly faced with the risk of cyber incidents. Damage to computer systems and theft of sensitive data caused by cyber attacks have the potential to result in lasting harm to entities under attack, or to society as a whole. The effects of cyber attacks are not always obvious, and detecting them is not a simple proposition. As the U.S. federal government believes that information sharing on cybersecurity issues among organizations is essential to safety, security, and resilience, the importance of trusted information exchange has been emphasized to support public and private decision making by encouraging the creation of the Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC). Through a decision‐theoretic approach, this article provides new perspectives on ISAC, and the advent of the new Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations (ISAOs), which are intended to provide similar benefits to organizations that cannot fit easily into the ISAC structure. To help understand the processes of information sharing against cyber threats, this article illustrates 15 representative information sharing structures between ISAC, government, and other participating entities, and provide discussions on the strategic interactions between different stakeholders. This article also identifies the costs of information sharing and information security borne by different parties in this public‐private partnership both before and after cyber attacks, as well as the two main benefits. This article provides perspectives on the mechanism of information sharing and some detailed cost–benefit analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Meilin He & Laura Devine & Jun Zhuang, 2018. "Perspectives on Cybersecurity Information Sharing among Multiple Stakeholders Using a Decision‐Theoretic Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 215-225, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:2:p:215-225
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12878
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12878
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12878?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2014. "A game-theoretic analysis of information sharing and security investment for complementary firms," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(11), pages 1682-1691, November.
    2. Esther Gal-Or & Anindya Ghose, 2005. "The Economic Incentives for Sharing Security Information," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 186-208, June.
    3. Hausken, Kjell, 2006. "Income, interdependence, and substitution effects affecting incentives for security investment," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 629-665.
    4. Gordon, Lawrence A. & Loeb, Martin P. & Lucyshyn, William, 2003. "Sharing information on computer systems security: An economic analysis," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 461-485.
    5. Zhuang, Jun & Bier, Vicki M. & Alagoz, Oguzhan, 2010. "Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 409-418, June.
    6. Jun Zhuang & Vicki M. Bier, 2010. "Reasons for Secrecy and Deception in Homeland‐Security Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1737-1743, December.
    7. Nikoofal, Mohammad E. & Zhuang, Jun, 2015. "On the value of exposure and secrecy of defense system: First-mover advantage vs. robustness," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 320-330.
    8. Hausken, Kjell, 2007. "Information sharing among firms and cyber attacks," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 639-688.
    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. Jian Wang & Jin-Chun Huang & Shan-Lin Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Ting Zhu, 2021. "Improvement Path for Resource-Constrained Cities Identified Using an Environmental Co-Governance Assessment Framework Based on BWM-mV Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-30, May.
    2. Tania Wallis & Rafał Leszczyna, 2022. "EE-ISAC—Practical Cybersecurity Solution for the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    3. María Jesús Ávila-Gutiérrez & Alejandro Martín-Gómez & Francisco Aguayo-González & Antonio Córdoba-Roldán, 2019. "Standardization Framework for Sustainability from Circular Economy 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-26, November.
    4. Zhiheng Xu & Jun Zhuang, 2019. "A Study on a Sequential One‐Defender‐N‐Attacker Game," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1414-1432, June.
    5. Natalie M. Scala & Allison C. Reilly & Paul L. Goethals & Michel Cukier, 2019. "Risk and the Five Hard Problems of Cybersecurity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2119-2126, October.
    6. Kjell Hausken & Jonathan W. Welburn & Jun Zhuang, 2024. "A Review of Attacker–Defender Games and Cyber Security," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, August.
    7. Gregory Levitin & Liudong Xing & Hong‐Zhong Huang, 2019. "Security of Separated Data in Cloud Systems with Competing Attack Detection and Data Theft Processes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 846-858, April.
    8. Lu Xu & Yanhui Li & Jing Fu, 2019. "Cybersecurity Investment Allocation for a Multi-Branch Firm: Modeling and Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, July.

    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. Tania Wallis & Rafał Leszczyna, 2022. "EE-ISAC—Practical Cybersecurity Solution for the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Kjell Hausken, 2017. "Security Investment, Hacking, and Information Sharing between Firms and between Hackers," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Yong Wu & Mengyao Xu & Dong Cheng & Tao Dai, 2022. "Information Security Strategies for Information-Sharing Firms Considering a Strategic Hacker," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 99-122, June.
    4. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong, 2016. "A differential game approach to security investment and information sharing in a competitive environment," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(6), pages 511-526, June.
    5. Kjell Hausken, 2017. "Information Sharing Among Cyber Hackers in Successive Attacks," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(02), pages 1-33, June.
    6. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2013. "Information Security Investment When Hackers Disseminate Knowledge," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 352-368, December.
    7. Kjell Hausken & Jonathan W. Welburn & Jun Zhuang, 2024. "A Review of Attacker–Defender Games and Cyber Security," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, August.
    8. Xiaotong Li, 2022. "An evolutionary game‐theoretic analysis of enterprise information security investment based on information sharing platform," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(3), pages 595-606, April.
    9. Kjell Hausken, 2018. "Proactivity and Retroactivity of Firms and Information Sharing of Hackers," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-30, March.
    10. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell & Taboada, Heidi A. & Coit, David W., 2012. "Data survivability vs. security in information systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 19-27.
    11. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2014. "A game-theoretic analysis of information sharing and security investment for complementary firms," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(11), pages 1682-1691, November.
    12. Yong Wu & Gengzhong Feng & Richard Y. K. Fung, 2018. "Comparison of information security decisions under different security and business environments," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(5), pages 747-761, May.
    13. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong, 2016. "Economic incentives in security information sharing: the effects of market structures," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 361-377, December.
    14. Xinbao Liu & Xiaofei Qian & Jun Pei & Panos M. Pardalos, 2018. "Security investment and information sharing in the market of complementary firms: impact of complementarity degree and industry size," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 413-436, February.
    15. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2015. "Security investment and information sharing under an alternative security breach probability function," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 423-438, April.
    16. Daniel Schatz & Rabih Bashroush, 0. "Economic valuation for information security investment: a systematic literature review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    17. 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.
    18. Chul Ho Lee & Xianjun Geng & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2016. "Mandatory Standards and Organizational Information Security," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 70-86, March.
    19. Daniel Schatz & Rabih Bashroush, 2017. "Economic valuation for information security investment: a systematic literature review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 1205-1228, October.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:2:p:215-225. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.