NTW203
Network Security
Individual Report
1500 words +/-10%
Purpose of the assessment is to build the students’ skills in analyzing network security incidents, evaluating threats, applying security solutions, and drafting policies. It enhances critical thinking and practical problem-solving essential for a Network Security Analyst.
100
In this individual assessment, students will take on the role of a Network Security Analyst for a medium-sized enterprise. They are given a simulated incident involving a potential security breach across multiple network platforms (wired, wireless, mobile). Students must conduct a detailed incident analysis and produce a formal security report.
A manufacturing company has reported unusual network behavior, triggering multiple alerts on its Intrusion Prevention System (IPS). The company relies on both wired and wireless networks, including remote access for mobile devices. Suspicious activity includes:
The incident poses risks to confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of the company’s sensitive data.
You are required to submit an incident analysis report that:
| Marking Criteria | Fail (0–49) | Pass (50–64) | Credit (65–74) | Distinction (75–84) | High Distinction (85–100) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of Key Security Concepts (20%) | Incomplete or incorrect evaluation | Identifies basic security concepts with limited depth | Explains key concepts adequately | Thorough explanation with critical insights | Exceptional evaluation with advanced critical insights |
| Threat Identification and Analysis (20%) | Fails to identify threats or provides minimal analysis | Identifies some threats with limited depth | Provides clear identification and adequate analysis | In-depth analysis with good insights | Comprehensive analysis with innovative approaches |
| Use of Anomaly Detection Techniques (10%) | Minimal or incorrect use of techniques | Demonstrates basic understanding of anomaly detection | Clear application of detection techniques | Critical application with insightful observations | Advanced and creative detection methods |
| Explanation of Cryptography Principles (10%) | Incorrect or incomplete description | Describes cryptography but lacks clarity or depth | Explains principles accurately | Demonstrates deep understanding with examples | Exceptional understanding with applied insights |
| Firewall and IPS Recommendations (10%) | No recommended or suitable solutions | Recommends basic firewall or IPS solutions | Recommends effective solutions with explanations | Provides justified recommendations | Exceptional solutions with innovative suggestions |
| Device Installation and Monitoring (10%) | Poor or missing steps for monitoring | Describes basic installation and monitoring steps | Explains effective monitoring procedures | Provides detailed steps with examples | Exceptional techniques with applied scenarios |
| Development of Network Security Policy (10%) | Lacks policy or incorrect sections | Presents basic policy with missing elements | Structured policy with clear sections | Develops a comprehensive policy | Exceptional policy with innovative and realistic strategies |
| Structure and Organization of Report (5%) | Report lacks organisation and clarity; missing sections | Report follows basic structure with some disorganisation | Well-organised report covering all required sections | Clear, concise, and logically structured | Exceptional organisation, polished, and professional |
| Referencing and Citation (5%) | No referencing | Some referencing | Mostly accurate referencing | Referencing is accurate | Perfect APA referencing |
Assessment 3b – Rubric for Presentation/Viva on Network Security Systems (10%)
| Marking Criteria | Fail (0–49) | Pass (50–64) | Credit (65–74) | Distinction (75–84) | High Distinction (85–100) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presentation Content and Relevance (20%) | Content is irrelevant or unclear; key points missing | Basic content covers some important points but lacks depth | Good content covering key elements of network security | Well-developed content with clear focus | Outstanding, insightful, and highly relevant content |
| Explanation of Implementation (20%) | Inaccurate or insufficient explanation of security implementations | Basic explanation with limited detail on implementation | Sound explanation with most aspects covered adequately | Detailed explanation of implementation process | Comprehensive, clear, and innovative explanation |
| Oral Communication and Engagement (20%) | Limited engagement with audience; voice unclear or difficult to follow | Some engagement but with limited clarity in speech | Engages audience with clear communication and minor inconsistencies | Confident delivery with clear communication throughout | Exceptional delivery; engaging, confident, and persuasive |
| Use of Visual Aids (Slides) (10%) | Visual aids are missing or unclear | Basic slides provided but lack visual appeal or clarity | Slides are well-organised and support the presentation | Slides are visually appealing and enhance the presentation | Exceptional slides; visually engaging and highly supportive |
| Questions / Answers (Viva) (30%) | Unable to answer questions or respond meaningfully | Answers some questions with difficulty or limited knowledge | Handles most questions competently with adequate responses | Confidently answers questions with well-considered responses | Exceptional handling of questions with insightful response |
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
