Week 6 Discussions: Systems Discussion 1 – The New Beginning

Wk6 Discussionsinfo Systemsdiscussion 1the New Beginning And Prototyp

Evaluate prototyping as a technique for gathering quality business requirements. Determine the approach to prototyping that would be better suited for emerging technology projects. Determine if a combination of prototyping approaches would be more efficient. Explain your answer.

Explain why project risk management is a key component to bringing a project to a successful conclusion and describe the relationship between project risk management and cost estimation.

Organizations need to be aware of, and comply with, the Payment Card Industry – Data Security Standards (PCI-DSS) to ensure the safeguarding of cardholder information. Review the PCI-Data Security Standard, located at , and be prepared to discuss.

Due in large part to breach notification laws, we have heard about many more data breaches in the past few years. From the e-Activity, describe the main elements of data breach notification laws. Discuss the importance of breach notification for credit card information, as it relates to PCI-DSS. Describe the concept of a safe harbor and how that impacts an organization when developing its security methods. Determine if breach notification laws should define a minimum level of encryption to qualify for safe harbor and describe why or why not.

Paper For Above instruction

Prototyping stands as a pivotal technique in the realm of business analysis and software development for gathering high-quality requirements. It involves creating an initial model or version of a system to elucidate requirements, facilitate communication among stakeholders, and validate functionalities before full-scale development (Sommerville, 2016). This iterative process allows stakeholders to visualize and interact with the evolving system, thereby reducing ambiguities and misinterpretations that often plague traditional requirements gathering methods. The advantages of prototyping include increased stakeholder engagement, improved clarity of requirements, and early detection of potential issues, which collectively contribute to the delivery of a system that better aligns with business objectives (Larman & Basili, 2003). Nonetheless, the effectiveness of prototyping depends on the approach employed.

Regarding approaches to prototyping, there are primarily three: throwaway prototyping, evolutionary prototyping, and incremental prototyping. For emerging technology projects, evolutionary prototyping is often better suited, as it allows for continuous refinement and adaptation of the prototype to incorporate new technological insights and evolving requirements (Sommerville, 2016). Emerging technologies tend to be uncertain and rapidly changing, which makes the fixed scope of throwaway prototypes less effective. Evolutionary prototypes accommodate this uncertainty by enabling progressive refinement, reducing the risk of obsolescence. Furthermore, a hybrid approach combining aspects of incremental and evolutionary prototyping can be more efficient, especially for complex projects requiring modular development. Such a combination facilitates incremental delivery, allowing stakeholders to receive functional components progressively while maintaining flexibility to adapt to emerging technological trends (Boehm, 1988). Therefore, a flexible hybrid approach often yields better outcomes in fast-evolving technological landscapes.

Project risk management is critical to the successful completion of projects because it systematically identifies, assesses, and mitigates potential problems that could derail project objectives (Kerzner, 2017). Effective risk management ensures that uncertainties are addressed proactively, reducing their impact on project scope, schedule, and budget. Additionally, risk management directly influences cost estimation by providing a framework to incorporate contingency reserves and realistic assumptions. Accurate risk assessments help project managers allocate appropriate resources and buffer funds, thereby preventing cost overruns and schedule delays (Hillson & Murray-Webster, 2017). In essence, risk management serves as a safeguard, enabling project teams to navigate uncertainties confidently and increasing the likelihood of project success.

Organizations handling sensitive payment card information must comply with PCI-DSS standards, which stipulate comprehensive security controls to protect cardholder data. The PCI-Data Security Standard emphasizes requirements such as encryption, access controls, and regular monitoring to prevent data breaches (PCI Security Standards Council, 2018). One critical aspect is data breach notification laws, enacted in many jurisdictions, mandating organizations to inform affected parties and authorities swiftly upon discovering a breach. These laws typically specify key elements such as scope, timelines, and required disclosures (Reynolds et al., 2020). The importance of breach notification, especially for credit card information, lies in minimizing harm by enabling affected individuals to take protective measures, and in maintaining trust and regulatory compliance.

The concept of a safe harbor pertains to legal or regulatory provisions that protect organizations from certain liabilities if they meet predefined security standards, often including encryption levels. When developing security methods, safe harbors incentivize organizations to implement robust controls, such as strong encryption, to qualify for these protections (Gralla, 2017). Regarding breach notification laws, there is an ongoing debate about whether they should specify minimum encryption standards. Including such standards could encourage uniform security practices and reduce breach severity but may also impose rigid compliance requirements that could hinder innovative security solutions. Nonetheless, establishing minimum encryption levels within breach laws could incentivize organizations to adopt strong protective measures, thereby enhancing overall data security and reducing the incidence and impact of breaches (Cappelli et al., 2019).

References

• Boehm, B. W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer, 21(5), 61-72.
• Cappelli, D., Moore, A., & Trzeciak, R. (2019). The CERT Guide to Insider Threats: How to Detect and Prevent Employee, Contractor, and Business Partner Intrusions. Addison-Wesley.
• Gralla, P. (2017). Social Engineering: The Science of Human Hacking. Syngress.
• Hillson, D., & Murray-Webster, R. (2017). Understanding and Managing Risk Attitude. Routledge.
• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Wiley.
• Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental development: A brief history. Computer, 36(6), 47-56.
• PCI Security Standards Council. (2018). Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard v3.2.1.
• Reynolds, M., Briscoe, M., & Chakraborty, S. (2020). Cybersecurity Law and Policy. Routledge.
• Sommerville, I. (2016). Software Engineering (10th ed.). Pearson.