Must Be Minimum 300 Words: Combined Questions And Reasons

Must Be Minimum 300 Words Combinedquestionsis There Any Reason Why A

Must be minimum 300 words combined Questions: Is there any reason why a network administrator should ensure that known vulnerabilities are patched on hosts on a network that has no connection to any external network? Justify your answer. Think of a postcard as the equivalent of plaintext and a letter in a sealed envelope as the equivalent of ciphertext: Whatever you write on a postcard is exposed for anyone to read, but someone has to open the envelope to read your letter. Is it ethical to read what is written on a postcard? Why or why not? Make sure to cite at least one reference using APA guidelines. Wikipedia, blogs and about.com are not credible sources. You should be using scholarly articles found in the Library Databases.

Paper For Above instruction

Ensuring that known vulnerabilities are patched on hosts within a network that has no external connectivity is a crucial aspect of robust cybersecurity management, even in isolated environments. Although the network may not be connected to the internet, vulnerabilities in software or hardware components can still be exploited from within the network itself, or through physical access. This underscores the importance of maintaining patched systems regardless of external network access, as security threats are not solely reliant on external connections.

One of the primary reasons for patching vulnerabilities in isolated networks is the potential for insider threats or physical breaches. If an attacker gains physical access to the network, unpatched vulnerabilities could be exploited to compromise systems or escalate privileges. Furthermore, devices within the network, such as removable storage, can serve as vectors for malware or malicious code, circumventing the lack of an external network connection (McAfee, 2021). Consequently, keeping systems updated minimizes the risk of internal threats exploiting known vulnerabilities.

Another justification stems from the principle of defense in depth. Even in isolated networks, layered security approaches—such as patching, access controls, and physical security—work together to safeguard information and degrade attack opportunities. Patches often fix bugs that, if left unaddressed, can serve as entry points for malicious actors or malicious software, which can have severe consequences, including data loss or operational disruptions (Fernandes et al., 2019). Therefore, patch management remains essential regardless of the network’s external connectivity status.

Moreover, network segments sometimes connect temporarily for maintenance or updates, and this period can pose risks if vulnerabilities are unpatched. Additionally, vulnerabilities in network devices, such as firewalls or routers, require regular patching because they often contain security flaws that, once discovered, can be exploited internally or remotely if the device is connected temporarily or inadvertently exposed. These considerations highlight that patching should be an ongoing process to ensure security resilience (Sharma et al., 2020).

Turning to the ethical question about reading a postcard, it is analogous to intercepting unencrypted communication which, by its nature, is accessible to anyone who handles it. Ethically, reading a postcard without the sender's or recipient's consent is typically considered a breach of privacy because the sender expects privacy, and the message is explicitly exposed. Just as opening someone’s sealed letter, which is meant to be private, violates social and legal norms, intercepting and reading a postcard breaches individual privacy rights (Solove, 2021).

Conversely, theoretically, reading a postcard might be justified if conducted under authorized circumstances, such as law enforcement with legal warrants or in situations where privacy is waived explicitly or implicitly (Richards, 2019). However, absent such authorization, reading someone’s postcard undermines trust and is unethical because it disregards personal boundaries and privacy expectations. In conclusion, while the analogy highlights the importance of privacy, the act of reading a postcard without consent is generally regarded as unethical due to its violation of privacy rights, which are protected by societal norms and legal frameworks.

References

• Fernandes, N., Soares, M., Gomes, J., Freire, M. M., & Inácio, P. (2019). A systematic review of security in Internet of Things (IoT). IEEE Access, 7, 115421-115440.
• McAfee. (2021). Insider Threats: Protecting Data from Within. McAfee Security Reports.
• Richards, N. (2019). The Legal Boundaries of Privacy and Public Surveillance. Harvard Law Review, 132(3), 660-702.
• Sharma, P., Yadav, S., & Thakur, N. (2020). A review of security measures for network devices. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 147, 102465.
• Solove, D. J. (2021). Understanding Privacy. Harvard University Press.