Question: 1. There are three scenarios under consideration that would trigger the NEO. We will call them A, B, and C. Scenario A involves a coup
1. There are three scenarios under consideration that would trigger the NEO. We will call them A, B, and C.
Scenario A involves a coup attempt.
Scenario B involves hostilities commencing against a neighboring US ally.
Scenario C involves internal terrorism directed against US nationals.
We have tentatively assigned each of these "trigger" scenarios the following probabilities.
P(A) = .3
P(B) = .2
P(C) = .5
We believe that a network attack (N) against the JTF might be part of the scenarios. Based on preliminary analysis, the chance of a network attack depends on the scenario. We have the following probabilities:
P(N|A)=.3
P(N|B)=.9
P(N|C)=.1
We have two friendly courses of action (COA), I and II. The following table depicts expected friendly losses for each course of action and scenario. A, B , and C respectively
COA 1 30 150 25
COA 2 40 100 30
We use failed log-in attempts on our non-classified PAO server as an (unclassified) intensity indicator of the likelihood of attacks on the secure systems. The time between failed log-in episodes (one episode might include several attempts by the same user until he/she is locked out) is well modeled by the exponential distribution with a mean of forty minutes.
a. Devise a rule based on failed log-in episodes that would indicate that we are experiencing a network attack. The rule should have a false alarm rate of only 1%.
b. Given that your rule has indicated a network attack, revise the probabilities for the different scenarios.
c. Using those revised probabilities, calculate the expected number of casualties for COA I and II.
d. Using the revised probabilities, draw the CDF for the number of casualties under COA I and II on the same graph.
e. In your professional opinion, which COA do you recommend? Why? Justify your decision in writing.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts
