Unit 10 IT595

Unit Outcomes:

Develop a project presentation that synthesizes an effective and ethical cybersecurity solution.
Describe your decision analysis for your project.

Course Outcome:

IT595-4: Decision Analysis: Analyze data using accepted best practices for the purpose of synthesizing an effective and ethical cybersecurity solution.

Purpose

You are almost done! It is time to present your project to the stakeholders. Imagine you are standing right in front of them. You will put together a PowerPoint presentation that includes your audio narration. Remember, good communication skills are important for professional success and especially in cybersecurity. Good luck!

Assignment Instructions

Develop a project presentation to stakeholders.

Imagine your project has been completed and it is time to present a summary of it to the project stakeholders. You will prepare a professional PowerPoint presentation. If you want to use another presentation tool, please consult your instructor.

The presentation will also contain audio narration for each slide and a script for the narration in the notes section of the slide. The presentation should contain at least 25 SLIDES covering the purpose of the project, detailed descriptions of each milestone, your decision analysis throughout the project, industry best practices used, and finally why you think your solution is effective and ethical.

The rubric will provide further instructions on specific requirements for the assignment.

Assignment Requirements

You should follow current APA format, if appropriate.

PLEASE USE ATTACHED FOR THE INFORMATION FOR THE MILESTONES. 25 SLIDES MINIUMUM! AND A TRANSCRIPT FOR EACH SLIDE

Unit 1 Assignment 1

Unit 1 IT595

Clifford Shells

Purdue University Global

IT595: Master’s Capstone in Cybersecurity Management

December 8, 2024

Introduction

As cyber threats continue to evolve and become more pronounced, higher levels of security in organizational contexts have become relevant. Organizations must proactively manage employee stress, persistent skills shortages, budgetary constraints, and rising cyber risks as cyber threats increase in complexity and frequency. The cybersecurity landscape is changing more quickly than ever, according to ISACA’s 2024 State of Cybersecurity report, which compiled opinions from 1,868 cybersecurity experts globally. Endpoint security has become an issue of concern since most endpoints- laptops, smartphones, workstations, and others are central to most breaches (McKinsey & Company, 2022). This proposal provides a broad plan to address a core goal of the organization, the protection of endpoint devices through a zero-trust security design. Identity verification, micro-segmentation, and advanced threat vector identification are proposed as innovative principles to reduce risks associated with topping and data leakage to reflect modern approaches to cybersecurity.

Background of Organization

The proposed project will be based on a mid-sized financial services company with around 500 employees following a hybrid working modality. The described organization’s efficiency correlates with the need to protect confidential financial information exchanged between employees, clients, and partners. The company’s most recent penetration test established serious weaknesses in its endpoint protection, especially in client devices (Kamruzzaman et al., 2022). These security gaps can lead to an elevated risk towards data integrity, non-compliance with regulations such as the GDPR, and a profound impact on the organization’s reputation.

Problem

Conventional security based on the perimeter has not been adequate to guard organizations against new cyber threats. Devices ranging from laptops and tablets to wearables and smart speakers are now susceptible to endpoint security hazards, and network-connected printers can even be dangerous for businesses.

The increase in flexible work arrangements has contributed to the proliferation of endpoint devices. The prevalence of remote work has increased, and companies depend more on software solutions to collaborate with outside partners. However, because of their weaknesses, these endpoints are increasingly popular targets for hackers. As a result, IT teams now prioritize monitoring and mitigating endpoint security threats. Endpoint security used to be extremely easy: businesses would set up a secure network perimeter, assign and monitor devices, and keep a patching procedure in place to keep systems updated (Chandel et al., 2019).

However, the proliferation of linked devices, whether personal or company-issued, presents unique security challenges for enterprises today. Along with the expansion of devices, there is a persistent threat to IT environments. Even the biggest teams entrusted with monitoring and eliminating these threats are overwhelmed by the hundreds of thousands of new malware varieties that are discovered every day. Remote access to organizational resources and the increased use of BYOD policies only increases these weaknesses. Several gaps in endpoint security management have exposed the organization to APT, phishing, and ransomware threats. The lack of efficient, centralized, trust-based access control is an added problem that cannot be addressed without migrating to a stronger security paradigm.

Purpose of Project

This project aims to mitigate the endpoint security risks mentioned by deploying the Zero Trust security model. This approach, which follows the motto “never trust, always verify,” will require tight identity checks and continuous monitoring of all endpoint devices. Through adopting advanced tools like the MFA and EDR, the project seeks to establish a strong security posture that checks and validates users and endpoints continuously accessing organizational resources.

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), sometimes referred to as endpoint detection and threat response (EDTR), is an endpoint security solution that offers ongoing user device monitoring to detect and stop cyber threats like malware and ransomware (Karantzas & Patsakis, 2021). EDR is described as a system that “records and saves endpoint-level activities, employs various data analysis methods to spot suspicious behavior, offers contextual insights, prevents harmful actions, and suggests ways to recover affected systems.” Furthermore, by demanding several pieces of identity upon account registration, multi-factor authentication improves security (Suleski et al., 2023). This data is stored by the system so that it can validate the user on future login attempts.

Stakeholders

The project’s success will also depend on the full involvement of many stakeholders. Internal stakeholders include the IT department, security departments, directors/CEOs, and others who rely on the end-user devices to perform their activities. External stakeholders, including technology vendors and cybersecurity consultants, will be pivotal in delivering the tools and expertise as the implementation occurs. Regulatory agencies are also helpful for the project since the completed work must conform to the existing norms and standards of the field.

High-Level Costs Associated with the Project

Introducing the Zero Trust security model will cost a budgetary estimate of ninety-five thousand US Dollars. This includes Risk assessment costs ($15000), cost of acquisition of Security tools and technologies including EDR and IAM ($40000), costs in deployment and testing ($25000), and lastly, costs in training employees and documenting procedures ($10000) (Homeland Security, 2023). An additional $ 5000 has also been provided under contingency to meet any unanticipated expenses during the fiscal year. Although the expenses may seem high initially, the long-term advantages of avoiding cyber risks and maintaining compliance overshadow it.

Expected Outcomes of the Project

It should also be noted that the proposed Zero Trust security framework will produce several tangible and intangible outcomes. Some outcomes include fewer security attacks that target endpoints, high compliance with regulatory requirements on data protection, and more effective and secure access controls for users. The project will also help strengthen the organization by establishing it as a pioneer in implementing innovative cybersecurity mechanisms for generating confidence among clients and partners.

Risks to Project Completion and Proposed Mitigations

Several risks may exist and function as obstacles to the successful completion of this project. Employees and stakeholders can also resist the change; hence, it is a challenge that can be managed through education and training and constantly informing them of the gains of the change. Interoperability issues with existing structures often require final checks to assess the congruence before implementation (Huang et al., 2020). Another risk includes the challenges of incurring costs beyond the budgeted amounts, but a competent monitoring of costs and having a contingency fund will minimize this. Last, security during the transition phase is critical and must be conducted by retaining the previous measures until the new system entirely takes shape.

Milestone 1: Project Launch

The first phase focuses on the project’s initiation phase through planning and consulting with the stakeholders involved. This phase will initiate meetings to assess and describe the security vulnerabilities in the currently deployed endpoint architecture (Chandel et al., 2019). Each project shall have a clear charter, including the specific deliverables, goals, and expected results. The planning phase will also involve the development of a work schedule and responsibilities, as well as measures of checking the accomplishments made during its execution. This way, all the key stakeholders are on the same page regarding implementing the envisaged project, creating a platform for effective and efficient implementation.

Milestone 2: Risk Assessment & Architecture Design

The second model evaluates the risk and defines the dangerous areas and threats at the organization’s endpoint. The assessment will include monitoring network traffic, reading the access logs, and regularly testing potential attack scenarios. Consequently, an appropriate Zero Trust architecture compatible with the organization’s settings will be developed. Some design features are micro-segmentation to reduce the possibility of lateral movement, implementation of MFA to enhance the access controls, and choosing EDR for accurate time threat identification. Scalability will also be considered in the architectural design to allow for growth within the organization in the future.

Milestone 3: Implementation and Testing

The third and final milestone is the implementation of Zero Trust as a security model and conducting tests to assess its efficiency. The steps will involve deploying and setting up some of the chosen tools and technology within existing systems. The system’s security will also be assessed using the process referred to as penetration testing. Furthermore, there will be a User Acceptance Testing to capture feedback and fix some problems with the product’s usability. This milestone emphasizes iterative testing and improvement that confirms that the deployed system is operational and technically functional.

Milestone 4: Describe in Detail

The last stage is assessing the deployed system’s success and fine-tuning the system based on the actual information gathered from the field and consumers. Specific indicators, such as the depreciation of the attempts made by unauthorized personnel and the time required to identify and tackle threats, will be thoroughly monitored through continuous monitoring tools. Such training sessions will be necessary to introduce employees to the new system and to stress security problems and precautions. So, creating and submitting the comprehensive project report is an integral part of the project to describe the results and recommendations for further improvement. This project’s last step leaves the organization ready to protect itself from increased threats with time.

Conclusion

The adoption of Zero Trust security architecture for endpoint protection is hailed as a milestone in mitigating cybersecurity risks that confront current businesses. As a result, risks would be reduced, and compliance would be improved by engaging in the latest technologies alongside promoting security awareness within this project. The specific tasks listed in this proposal make clear the steps that must be undertaken to implement the plan of action, guarantee the achievement of organizational goals, and comply with best practices. Lastly, the project aims to develop a long-term sustainable cybersecurity model to protect the organization’s assets and reputation.

References

Chandel, S., Yu, S., Yitian, T., Zhili, Z., & Yusheng, H. (2019). Endpoint Protection: Measuring the Effectiveness of Remediation Technologies and Methodologies for Insider Threat.
2019 International Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distributed Computing and Knowledge Discovery (CyberC). https://doi.org/10.1109/cyberc.2019.00023

Homeland Security. (2023).
FY 2024 Budget in Brief. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-03/DHS%20FY%202024%20BUDGET%20IN%20BRIEF%20%28BIB%29_Remediated

Huang, C., Koppel, R., McGreevey, J. D., Craven, C. K., & Schreiber, R. (2020). Transitions from One Electronic Health Record to Another: Challenges, Pitfalls, and Recommendations.
Applied Clinical Informatics,
11(05), 742–754. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718535

Kamruzzaman, A., Ismat, S., Brickley, J. C., Liu, A., & Thakur, K. (2022, December 1).
A Comprehensive Review of Endpoint Security: Threats and Defenses. IEEE Xplore. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCWS56285.2022.9998470

Karantzas, G., & Patsakis, C. (2021). An Empirical Assessment of Endpoint Detection and Response Systems against Advanced Persistent Threats Attack Vectors.
Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy,
1(3), 387–421. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp1030021

McKinsey & Company. (2022, March 10).
Cybersecurity trends: Looking over the horizon | McKinsey. Www.mckinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/cybersecurity/cybersecurity-trends-looking-over-the-horizon

Suleski, T., Ahmed, M., Yang, W., & Wang, E. (2023). A Review of multi-factor Authentication on the Internet of Healthcare Things.
Digital Health,
9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231177144

Unit 9 Assignment 1

Unit 9 IT595

Clifford Shells

Purdue University Global

IT595: Master’s Capstone in Cybersecurity Management

February 10, 2025

Milestone 4: Assessment and Finalization – Status Report

Milestone 4 entails the final stage of the cybersecurity project and aims at assessing the implemented system’s efficiency to achieve any adjustments. This stage focuses on reviewing the attempts made by unauthorized people, detecting the times taken to respond to the threats, and providing feedback on the users’ sessions. This will guarantee that the organization is ready to manage new threats arising within the new future occasionally.

figure 1 Configuration of the Network Security System

Recommendations for Stakeholders

Enhanced continuous monitoring requires artificially intelligent technologies that are used to surveillance and prevent threats to computers in real-time (Aminu, Akinsanya, Dako, & Oyedokun, 2024). Using machine learning techniques, organizations can identify bumps quickly enough, thus ensuring a faster response and preventing losses from the resulting impacts. In addition, using SIEM enhances the monitoring of logs, which means overall monitoring is achieved and made effective.

Zero Trust Enforcement enhances the authentication process by implementing MFA and applying zero trust principles with micro-segmentation (Patel & Chaudhary, 2024). Some measures that organizations should implement include identity-based access control and context-awareness authentication to exclude unauthorized access. Role-based access and just-in-time privilege escalation are good practices as they minimize the exposure to potential threats.

Being aware of common threats that may arise due to employee negligence, employee training programs organize recurring cybersecurity sessions to refresh employees on the relevant preventive measures. Employees must comprehend the objectives of phishing attacks and social engineering within an organization and the safer approach to passwords to minimize threats.

figure 2 Monitoring Logs & Performance Metrics

Tasks Completed (Updated WBS)

Task

Planned Duration (Days)

Actual Duration (Days)

Notes

Deployment of Continuous Monitoring Tools

Additional testing required

System Performance Evaluation

Adjustments to security settings needed

User Training Sessions

Completed as planned

Final Penetration Testing

Extra retesting for vulnerabilities

Documentation & Reporting

Finalized and submitted

Lessons Learned

Point five of the Importance of Real-Time Monitoring states that automated threat identification improves response to threats (Aminu, Akinsanya, Dako, & Oyedokun, 2024). One of the benefits of implementing artificial intelligence and machine learning for analytical predictions is that it provides organizations with the necessary tools to consider threats before they become problematic. Besides, monitoring across different system layers provides a more thorough outlook on security issues.

The article User Engagement is Key also acknowledges that active engagement in the training sessions minimizes compliance with risks and openings (Silic & Lowry, 2020). End-user awareness is also important within the organization; hence, it is reassuring that the employees are trained to embrace a good working culture to curb cyber threats. Such incentives can be used supplementarily to engage the learner further and reinforce the training session’s content.

The reasons stated in the topic ‘Stakeholder Communication is Vital’ state that feedback loops are used for increased system effectiveness and to meet the demands of real-life situations to improve stakeholder communication. Business institutions seeking clear communication with stakeholders such as IT departments, managerial level, and customers will be uniquely positioned to implement security solutions in response to their requirements. Such security implementations will be more accomplished by doing regular security briefings and collaborative sessions and making decisions.

figure 3 Creating a Data Breach Response Plan

Conclusion

Hence, Milestone 4 assessed the system’s effectiveness, adjustment of securities, and approximation for future cybersecurity threats. The documentation comprises the logbooks, penetration testing, training materials, and system configurations, among others, to show that the specified milestones were accomplished, and the project achieved its goals.

References
Aminu, M., Akinsanya, A., Dako, D. A., & Oyedokun, O. (2024). Enhancing cyber threat detection through real-time threat intelligence and adaptive defence mechanisms. International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research, 13(8), 11-27. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ayokunle-Akinsanya/publication/382782321_Enhancing_Cyber_Threat_Detection_through_Real-time_Threat_Intelligence_and_Adaptive_Defense_Mechanisms/links/66abc9a12361f42f23abd2a1/Enhancing-Cyber-Threat-Detection-through-Real-time-Threat-Intelligence-and-Adaptive-Defense-Mechanisms
Patel, A., & Chaudhary, M. (2024). Zero Trust Architecture: A Comprehensive Guide to Modern IT Security. Baltic Multidisciplinary Research Letters Journal, 1(3), 44–53. https://www.bmrlj.com/index.php/Baltic/article/view/24
Silic, M., & Lowry, P. B. (2020). Using design-science-based gamification to improve organizational security training and compliance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(1), 129–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1705512

image3

image1

image2

Unit 7 Assignment 1

Unit 7 IT

Clifford Shells

Purdue University Global

IT595: Master’s Capstone in Cybersecurity Management

January

5, 2025

Milestone

: Implementation and Testing – Status Report

Implementation and Testing were recognizable as the last step of the cybersecurity project at milestone 3, which executes the Zero Trust security model and evaluates the performance of the model. The second phase of the process was dedicated to more precise activities involved in tool implementation, including rolling out MFA and EDR solutions as native components of the systems employed. This also entailed the performance of the security evaluation known as the Penetration Test and the User Acceptance Test or UAT (Ali, Ullah, Islam, & Hossain, 2025).

Figure 1 Steps to Design a Zero Trust System (geeks for geeks, 202

)

Figure 2 Flow Diagram of Multifactor Authenticator Code (login radius, 2025)

This paper contains the stakeholders’ recommendations, tasks accomplished, new WBS, and the experience gained while implementing the report’s milestones.

Recommendations for Stakeholders

Based on this milestone, the following cybersecurity theories and frameworks are recommended for managing risks, threats, and vulnerabilities:

Zero Trust Model: People should use the never trust, always verify approach (Buck, Olenberger, Schweizer, Völter, & Eymann, 2021). This model removes the attack surface by continuously validating users, devices, and network activity at every organizational level. Micro-segmentation is used to restrict amounts of lateral mobility by segmenting the network into protection rings, while the integration of MFA guarantees strong authentication of users.

Defense-in-Depth Framework: Bi-security measures should remain a priority. EDR, firewalls, and encryption prevent ongoing attacks and minimize data leakage even if an attacker is already inside the network.

Continuous Monitoring and Threat Detection: To introduce real-time AI analytics for anomaly detection and menace prediction, it should be noted that.

Regular

Penetration Testing

: Penetration testing is conducted periodically to ensure that the security measures available and recently implemented have been assessed and revised.

Figure 3 Penetration Testing Flow Chart

Tasks Completed

During this milestone, the following tasks were conducted:

1.
Tool Deployment:

Implemented MFA and set up authentication effects to heighten user identification—Consolidated capable EDR products for endpoint detection and quick threat reaction.

2.
Penetration Testing:

Various forms of penetration testing are used to discover weaknesses that an adversary may notice in the system. There were documented vulnerabilities, applied patches were made, and re-secured to attest compliance.

User Acceptance Testing

(UAT):

Users were interviewed to discover problems with the interface and its functions. Several comments from advanced users were assembled, and changes were integrated to enhance general usability for all.

4.
Documentation and Reporting:

Designed elaborate configurations for the systems and records of tests and feedback. Revised the WBS to incorporate actual time and variations from the baseline schedule.

Updated Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

Table 1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

Task	Planned Duration (days)	Actual Duration (days)	Notes
MFA Deployment		3		4	Additional day for fine-tuning.
EDR Configuration	Completed as scheduled.
Penetration Testing	5	6	Required more retesting cycles.
User Acceptance Testing	Additional day for stakeholder input.
Final Documentation		2	Completed as planned.

Lessons Learned

1.
Importance of Thorough Testing: Many newcomers tried penetration testing and were surprised by some loopholes discovered, pointing out that tests should not be a one-time event.

2.
Stakeholder Involvement: UAT supported identifying stakeholders’ need for engagement during implementation. Based on their feedback, we improved by avoiding potential usability problems.

3.
Flexibility in Planning: Delays in some activities made the groups realize that a time buffer should be incorporated into the identified project schedule.

4.
Value of Documentation: Each environment’s configuration, test results, and adjustments were adequately documented and well communicated to keep track of the changes and promote efficiency as people changed their duties.

Conclusion

Therefore, this Mobile Computing project reached the goals set for Milestone 3 by implementing the Zero Trust model and assessing its efficacy. MFA also proved valuable with EDR, where penetration testing offered security confidence in endpoint functionality and UAT-tested usability. These accomplishments and what have been learned provide a good platform for keeping a secure and flexible organizational environment. Submissions of system configurations, tests, and feedback documentation are submitted to support the completion of the milestone.

References

Ali, M., Ullah, A., Islam, M. R., & Hossain, R. (2025). Assessing of software security reliability: Dimensional security assurance techniques.
Computers & Security, 150, 104230.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2024.104230

Buck, C., Olenberger, C., Schweizer, A., Völter, F., & Eymann, T. (2021). Never trust, always verify: A multivocal literature review on current knowledge and research gaps of zero-trust.
Computers & Security, 11, 102436.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102436

Geeks for geeks. (2024, Sep 09).
Zero Trust Architecture – System Design. Retrieved from geeks for geeks:

https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/zero-trust-architecture-system-design/

https://www.loginradius.com/docs/api/v2/customer-identity-api/multi-factor-authentication/authenticator/overview/

image3

image4

image1

image2

Unit

Assignment 1

Unit 5 Assignment 1

Unit 5 IT595

Clifford Shells

Purdue University Global

IT595: Master’s Capstone in Cybersecurity Management

January

025

Milestone 2:

Risk Assessment

& Architecture Design – Status Report

The second milestone of this project focused on conducting a comprehensive risk assessment and designing scalable Zero Trust architecture tailored to the organization’s cybersecurity needs. Building on the foundation established in Milestone 1, this phase focused on the enumeration of risks, evaluation of threats, and proposal of architectural changes to enhance endpoint security. Under this project, it is hoped to eliminate the vulnerabilities arising through the above-mentioned critical areas to formulate the base for strong organizational defense against cyber threats. The following sections present an overview of cybersecurity principles used for the current report, an overview of tasks conducted for this purpose, a summary of lessons learned as well as additional evidence in support of this broad priority.

Cybersecurity Principles and Research

The milestone incorporated key cybersecurity principles and modern strategies to ensure robust and adaptable architecture. The risk assessment entailed observing network activity to identify suspicious activity, reviewing access records to discover unauthorized attempts to obtain access, and using hypotheticals to exploit potential problems. These activities pointed out concerns that must be addressed when pursuing architectural design.

Vulnerability

Impact

Mitigation Strategy

Weak Password Policies

Elevated risk of breaches

Implement strong password policies (MFA)

Unsecured Endpoint Devices

Risk of lateral movement

Deploy EDR and enforce endpoint encryption

Lack of Traffic Monitoring Tools

Undetected anomalies

Adopt network traffic monitoring tools

The Zero Trust model served as the guiding principle for architecture design, emphasizing a “never trust, always verify” approach. In the design, some features that were provided were micro-segmentation for the basis of containing lateral movement within the network, MFA for more enhanced access controls, and EDR for detecting threats as they happen in the network. (Weinberg & Cohen, 202

). Furthermore, extensibility was considered to accommodate organizational growth. Recent studies on cybersecurity conducted by Bhat (2022) supported the modern techniques needed for cybersecurity problems, especially with the modern enhanced complications in cybersecurity (Bhat, 2022).

Metric	Value	Observation
Total Traffic Anomalies	125 anomalies/day	A high anomaly rate indicates vulnerabilities
Unauthorized IPs	15	Unregistered IPs attempting to access
Log-in Failures	2 3 /day	Suspicious activity from external sources

Figure 1: Key Elements of the Zero Trust Model (keepnetlabs, 2024)

Tasks Completed

This milestone was done according to the goals of the project, and several critical tasks were accomplished during this phase. The risk assessment in turn included analyzing the network traffic for suspicious activities, accessing the logs looking for signs of intrusions, and conducting security vulnerability tests whereby the networks were evaluated based on potential break-ins. All these activities allowed the instructor to learn some weaknesses within the organization.

Figure 2: Process of Risk Assessment

The architectural design phase resulted in a comprehensive Zero Trust blueprint. This entailed the setting of micro-segmentation to enable the segmentation of the data, the enhancement of the MFA mechanisms to the authentication procedures, and the enhancements of EDR solutions to the endpoint protection (Mahjabeen & Islam, 2024). There was also another element called stakeholder engagement when workshops are conducted to get feedback and to make sure architecture fulfills the organization’s requirements. All these tasks laid down a good relationship for better measures in place to improve the security of an organization.

Task	Planned Duration (days)	Actual Duration (days)	Notes
Risk Assessment			5	6	Delays due to complex log analysis
Architecture Blueprint Development		7	Completed as scheduled
MFA Implementation		4	Additional day for configuration validation
EDR Solution Deployment		3	No deviations

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

The updated Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) reflects the planned and actual durations for the tasks completed during this milestone. The assessment of risks in such a system took six days as opposed to the planned five days because log analysis was complicated. Likewise, MFA was implemented one day more than planned, since there were unanticipated configuration issues that needed to be resolved. The approach to the choice of the architectural design and deployment of the EDR solutions conformed to their schedule (Pereira, 2024). These minor deviations highlight the fact that work usually contains unexpected complications that require changes in planning. In general, the WBS shows the accomplishments made on the project and the blueprint for the following phases of the project. (Miranda, 2019).

Unauthorized

User ID	IP Address	Timestamp	Login Attempts	Status
1001	192.168.1.10	2024-12-31 12:45 PM		Unauthorized
1002	172.16.0.5	2024-12-31 1:15 PM	2	Authorized
1003	10.0.0.8	2024-12-31 2:00 PM

Lessons Learned

Several valuable lessons emerged during the implementation of this milestone. The first of these effects was the need for careful planning before action. When the general vulnerability assessment was implemented, other problems were discovered that had not been anticipated despite detailed schedule formation, and this showed why there should be more buffer periods for such plans. This engagement with stakeholders was particularly helpful as it enabled us to further adjust the architectural design suggested and ensure there were no significant issues with scalability. Also, the project showed the importance of the adaptable architectural concept, meaning the possibility of further growth of the proposed design. Such lessons will help to avoid scenarios in further steps of project management by shifting to a more suitable approach.

Conclusion

In Milestone 2, key risks were properly identified and Zero Trust architecture that best fits the organization was recommended. This grounded theoretical control milestone extended intentionality to initiative-taking risk identification and management, engagement with all stakeholders, and adoption of modifiable designs to create a robust, coherent blueprint for improving overall cybersecurity. This progress builds on the achievements of Milestone 1 and sets the stage for future phases of the project. The tasks completed and lessons learned in this phase will contribute to the timely and effective realization of the project’s overall objectives.

References
Bhat, S. (2022). Analysis of Cybersecurity for the Enterprise. https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-v6tj-zn63
keepnetlabs. (2024). What Is Zero Trust Architecture? Retrieved from keepnetlabs: https://keepnetlabs.com/blog/what-is-zero-trust-architecture
Mahjabeen, F., & Islam, M. A. (2024). Digital Defense Mechanisms: A Framework for Securing Broadcast Systems in the Age of Cyber Threats. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1-25. https://jomresearch.com/index.php/jomr/article/download/24/20
Miranda, E. (2019). Milestone planning: a participatory and visual approach. The Journal of Modern Project Management. https://journalmodernpm.com/manuscript/index.php/jmpm/article/download/JMPM02003/350
Pereira, G. (2024). EDR: Securing Low-Level Tracing for Intrusion Detection. Master’s thesis. https://search.proquest.com/openview/7e250bd35d05bf5c5672597fc787aa3d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y
Weinberg, A. I., & Cohen, K. (2024). Zero Trust Implementation in the Emerging Technologies Era: Survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09575. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.09575

image1

image2

Unit 3 Assignment 1

Unit 3 IT595

Clifford Shells

Purdue University Global

IT595: Master’s Capstone in Cybersecurity Management

December 20, 2024

Milestone 1: Project Launch – Status Report

Milestone 1 of the cybersecurity project, titled “Project Launch,” focused on initiating the project’s foundational elements. This included plotting a vulnerability scan for the architecture at the endpoints, consulting with the stakeholders, and developing an elaborate charter for the project. Further, the job execution of activities requires assembling a comprehensive working map, defining roles and responsibilities, and formulating effective means of assessing work implementation (Cohen, Naseraldin, Chaudhuri, & Pilati, 2019). These endeavors assumed that caning stakeholders would lead to the successful implementation of technology in the following phases.

Evaluation of Cybersecurity Theories, Principles, and Best Practices

This milestone incorporated foundational cybersecurity theories and principles for effective planning and assessment. In its basic form, the Zero Trust Model entailed verifying every user and every device for an attempt to access certain resources to avoid intrusions (Daah, Qureshi, Awan, & Konur, 2024). This model fits modern cybersecurity requirements as those who rely on implicit trust and allow access only this way go through the authentication and authorization layers.

Figure 1: Zero Trust Core Principles (gartner, 2024)

This was followed by the Defense-in-Depth Strategy which was focused on a detailed security measure for the right protection of that important asset. This is another strategy in protection since it distributes the risk across the network and the system and endpoint; thus, irrespective of the system getting attacked, the rest of the layers protect the property.

Figure 2: Defense-in-Depth Strategy (wiz, 2024)

Recent cybersecurity strategies were explored and integrated into the planning phase to address endpoint security:

·
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR): Tools and strategies were identified to enhance visibility into endpoints, enabling rapid detection and mitigation of threats (Arfeen, Ahmed, Khan, & Jafri, 2021).

·
Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Strengthening authentication processes became a priority to mitigate risks from compromised credentials (Cahyaningrum, 2024).

Figure 3: Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) (nist, 2024)

·
AI-Powered Threat Detection: Leveraging artificial intelligence for predictive analytics and real-time threat identification was incorporated as a best practice for long-term endpoint protection (Prince, et al., 2024).

These principles and strategies informed the vulnerability assessment process and laid the groundwork for a secure and effective implementation plan.

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Summary

A detailed Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was created to monitor tasks, timelines, and dependencies. The following outlines the key tasks and their planned vs. actual durations:

4 days

Task	Planned Duration	Actual Duration
Stakeholder Identification and Meetings	5 days	6 days
Vulnerability Assessment	7 days	8 days
Drafting the Project Charter		4 days
Planning Work Schedule and Assignments	3 days	2 days

The WBS, presented in a detailed table format as part of the evidence, shows slight deviations in some areas due to unforeseen challenges. These adjustments were necessary to accommodate stakeholder feedback and additional insights from the vulnerability assessment.

Figure 4: Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

Lessons Learned

The planning phase of the project offered valuable insights and highlighted areas for improvement. One key takeaway was the importance of stakeholder collaboration (Canfield, Mulvaney, & Chatelain, 2022). The inclusion of the stakeholders was also found useful in arrival at other issues, particularly the remote endpoints. These questions elicited imperatives for corrections on the holistic nature of the implemented project. The next lesson related to working on the table of the school week, which was determined during classes. The detailed vulnerability assessment process was slower in comparison with the planned work schedule because of multiple system reactiveness. This brought a good realization of the fact that there should be buffer periods to be included in the other timelines of the future. Lastly, flexibility appeared as the final key dimension which defines the success of LEPs (Dörnyei, 2020). Considering other stakeholders’ feedback and technical analysis was therefore useful in chasing goal congruence and overseeing all concerns as seen above. All these lessons will be taken to future milestones to improve efficiency, flexibility, and overall project outcome.

Conclusion

Milestone 1 achieved the goal by ensuring that all the stakeholders were on board, the risks in need of cybersecurity were identified, and a solid blueprint for this project had been developed. The experience from this phase will be taken forward in subsequent activities to achieve better results and timely completion of the project objectives.

References
Arfeen, A., Ahmed, S., Khan, M. A., & Jafri, S. F. (2021). Endpoint detection & response: A malware identification solution. 2021 International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security (ICCWS), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCWS53234.2021.9703010
Cahyaningrum, Y. (2024). Evaluation of System Access Security in The Implementation of MultiFactor Authentication (MFA) in Educational Institutions. Journal of Practical Computer Science, 11-19. http://repository.isi-ska.ac.id/6772/1/Evaluation%20of%20System%20Access_Yuniana-UPLOAD
Canfield, K. N., Mulvaney, K., & Chatelain, C. D. (2022). Using researcher and stakeholder perspectives to develop promising practices to improve stakeholder engagement in the solutions-driven research process. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00119-5
Cohen, Y., Naseraldin, H., Chaudhuri, A., & Pilati, F. (2019). Assembly systems in Industry 4.0 era: a road map to understand Assembly 4.0. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 4037-4054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04203-1
Daah, C., Qureshi, A., Awan, I., & Konur, S. (2024). Enhancing zero trust models in the financial industry through blockchain integration: A proposed framework. Electronics, 865. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13050865
Dörnyei, K. R. (2020). Limited edition packaging: objectives, implementations and related marketing mix decisions of a scarcity product tactic. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 617-627. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Krisztina-Doernyei/publication/342467438_Limited_edition_packaging_objectives_implementations_and_related_marketing_mix_decisions_of_a_scarcity_product_tactic/links/604b5a3192851c1bd4e31b58/Limited-edition-packaging-objectives-implementations-and-related-marketing-mix-decisions-of-a-scarcity-product-tactic
gartner. (2024). Implement Zero-Trust Architecture to Adapt to a Shifting Threat Landscape. Retrieved from gartner: https://www.gartner.com/en/cybersecurity/topics/zero-trust-architecture
nist. (2024). Multifactor authentication. Retrieved from nist: https://www.nist.gov/image/multifactor-authentificatonpng
Prince, N. U., Faheem, M. A., Khan, O. U., Hossain, K., Alkhayyat, A., Hamdache, A., & Elmouki, I. (2024). AI-Powered Data-Driven Cybersecurity Techniques: Boosting Threat Identification and Reaction. Nanotechnology Perceptions, 332-353. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Muhammad-Ashraf-Faheem/publication/384441701_AI-Powered_Data-Driven_Cybersecurity_Techniques_Boosting_Threat_Identification_and_Reaction/links/66f9408a9e6e82486ff584e0/AI-Powered-Data-Driven-Cybersecurity-Techniques-Boosting-Threat-Identification-and-Reaction
wiz. (2024, November 8). What is Defense in Depth? Best Practices for Layered Security. Retrieved from wiz: https://www.wiz.io/academy/defense-in-depth

image3

image4

image1

image2

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Unit 10 IT595 ”

Get high-quality paper

Guarantee! All work is written by expert writers!

Still stressed from student homework?

Get quality assistance from academic writers!

Order now