Debate: How will your administration ensure that Digital Government services are secure? Prepare a three to five paragraph introduction (briefing statement) for a general election debate question:How will your administration ensure that Digital Government services are secure?This question will be asked of all candidates participating in the debate (you should not address any single candidate or party).Your introduction must provide enough information that the candidates understand key terms as defined by you for the debate question:What is meant by “Digital Government services?” (previously called “e-Government” services)Where have past administrations fallen short in protecting Digital Government / e-Government services?What is meant by “Threats” (i.e. individual hackers, politically motivated hacktivists, criminal enterprises, and unfriendly “nation state” actors)If you need help getting started, read this article: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2848779/list-of-hacked-government-agencies-grows-state-department-white-house-noaa-and-usps.htmlProvide in-text citations and references for 3 or more authoritative sources. Put the reference list at the end of your posting.Timeliness of Briefing Statement or Paper12 pointsPosted briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Friday.10 pointsPosted briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Saturday.5 pointsPosted briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Sunday.0 pointsDid not post a briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Sunday.Briefing Statement or PaperExcellentOutstandingAcceptableNeeds ImprovementNeeds Significant ImprovementMissing or No Work SubmittedIntroduction to Briefing Statement or Paper10 pointsProvided an excellent introduction to the deliverable which clearly, concisely, and accurately addressed the topic of the briefing statement or paper. Appropriately paraphrased information from authoritative sources.8.5 pointsProvided an outstanding introduction to the deliverable which clearly and accurately addressed the topic of the briefing statement or paper. Appropriately paraphrased information from authoritative sources.7 pointsProvided an acceptable introduction to the deliverable which addressed the topic of the briefing statement or paper. Appropriately paraphrased information from authoritative sources.6 pointsProvided an introduction to the deliverable but the section lacked some required details. Information from authoritative sources was mentioned.4 pointsAttempted to provide an introduction to the deliverable but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources (too many quotations or improper paraphrasing).0 pointsIntroduction was missing or no work submitted.Analysis15 pointsProvided an excellent analysis of the issues for the required briefing topic. Addressed at least three separate issues and provided appropriate examples for each. Appropriately used and cited information from authoritative sources.13.5 pointsProvided an outstanding analysis of the issues for the required briefing topic. Addressed at least two separate issues and provided appropriate examples for each. Appropriately used and cited information from authoritative sources.12 pointsProvided an acceptable analysis of the issues for the required briefing topic. Addressed at least one specific issue and provided an appropriate example. Appropriately used and cited information from authoritative sources.11 pointsAddressed the required briefing topic but the analysis lacked details or was somewhat disorganized. Appropriately used and cited information from authoritative sources.8 pointsMentioned the required briefing topic but the analysis was very disorganized or off topic. OR, the analysis did not appropriately use information from authoritative sources (too many quotations or improper paraphrasing).0 pointsAnalysis was missing or no work was submitted.Summary10 pointsIncluded an excellent summary section for the briefing statement or paper which was on topic, well organized, and covered at least 3 key points. The summary contained at least one full paragraph.8.5 pointsIncluded an outstanding summary paragraph for the briefing statement or paper which was on topic and covered at least 3 key points.7 pointsIncluded a summary paragraph for the briefing statement or paper which was on topic and provided an appropriate closing.6 pointsIncluded a summary paragraph but, this section lacked content or was disorganized.4 pointsIncluded a few summary sentences for the briefing statement or paper.0 pointsDid not include a summary for the briefing statement or paper.Use of Authoritative Sources5 pointsIncluded and properly cited three or more authoritative sources (no errors).4 pointsIncluded and properly cited three or more authoritative sources (minor errors allowable).3 pointsIncluded and cited two or more authoritative sources (minor errors allowable). Reference list entries contain sufficient information to enable the reader to find and retrieve the cited sources.2 pointsIncluded and cited at least one authoritative source (errors allowable in citations or reference entries). Reference list entries contain sufficient information to enable the reader to find and retrieve the cited sources.1 pointMentioned at least one authoritative source but, the citations and/or reference list entries lacked required information (not sufficient to retrieve the correct resource).0 pointsReferences and citations were missing. Or, no work submitted.Professionalism10 pointsNo formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Submitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is appropriate to the assignment type.8.5 pointsWork contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance. Work needs some polishing to improve professional appearance.7 pointsErrors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which need attention / editing to improve professional appearance of the work.6 pointsSubmitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Substantial polishing / editing is required.4 pointsSubmitted work is difficult to read and/or understand. OR, work has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage which detract from the overall professional appearance of the work.0 pointsNo submission.Timeliness of PostingsOn TimeLateVery LateFirst Critique for Another Student2 pointsPosted a critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 pm ET on Saturday.1 pointPosted a critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsDid not post a critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Sunday.Second Critique for Another Student2 pointsPosted a second critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 pm ET on Saturday.1 pointPosted a second critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsDid not post a second critique of another student’s briefing statement or paper before 11:59 PM ET on Sunday.Follow-Up Reply or Discussion Participation2 pointsPosted a follow-up reply or discussion posting before 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsPosted a follow-up reply or discussion posting after 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsDid not post a follow-up reply in the week’s topic.Second Follow-Up Reply or Discussion Posting2 pointsPosted a second follow-up reply or discussion posting before 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsPosted a second follow-up reply or discussion posting after 11:59 pm ET on Sunday.0 pointsDid not post a second follow-up reply in the week’s topic.Quality of Discussion PostingsExcellentAcceptableNeeds ImprovementLow-Quality or No Work SubmittedPaper #2: Mobile App Security Assessment & StrategyScenario:A federal agency has asked your cybersecurity consulting firm to provide it with a white paper that discusses best practices for security architectures and designs for mobile apps. The white paper should also present the agency with a strategy for developing an award winning digital government mobile app for its submission to next years’ Mobi-Gov awards. The agency had several mobile apps in the “honorable mention” category this past year but, each of the apps failed to make passing scores in the mobile app security category.  The contest rules do not allow revision and resubmission of entries from prior years. For this reason, your starting point should be recommendations for a security architecture for a completely new mobile app. The scoring for the awards is organized around the three strategies from the federal government’s digital government strategy (see https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government.html ).1.Enable the American people and an increasingly mobile workforce to access high-quality digital government information and services anywhere, anytime, on any device.2.Ensure that as the government adjusts to this new digital world, we seize the opportunity to procure and manage devices, applications, and data in smart, secure and affordable ways.3.Unlock the power of government data to spur innovation across our Nation and improve the quality of services for the American people.Research:1.Research the “best” of federal mobile apps to see examples of the type of apps the agency will be competing against next year.a.19 of the Coolest Government Mobile Apps https://www.govloop.com/community/blog/cool-gov-mobile-apps/ b.10 Most Entertaining Government Mobile Apps https://www.govloop.com/community/blog/10-most-entertaining-government-mobile-apps/c.3 Innovative Ways Agencies are Leveraging Mobile Apps http://fedscoop.com/great-government-mobile-apps 2.Research the federal government’s perspective on mobile app security architectures and design recommendations. Here are three sources to help you get started:a.Mobile App Developers: Start with Security https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/mobile-app-developers-start-securityb.Mobile Security Reference Architecture https://cio.gov/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/05/Mobile-Security-Reference-Architecture.pdf c.Architecture and Design Considerations for Secure Software (Mobile Applications)https://buildsecurityin.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/ArchitectureAndDesign_PocketGuide_v2%200_05182012_PostOnline.pdf 3.Research industry recommendations for mobile app security. Begin with the following sources:a. OWASP Mobile Security Project https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Mobile_Security_Project b.Top 10 Mobile Risks (click on tab) https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Mobile_Security_Projectc.Mobile app security: Always keep the back door locked http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/02/mobile-app-security-always-keep-the-back-door-locked/  4.Find five or more best practice recommendations for ensuring the security of mobile apps. These recommendations must include security for the platform (mobile device), the data on the device, and the transmission path between the device and the mobile application server.Write:Write a five (5) to eight (8) page white paper in which you summarize your research and present your “best practices” based strategy for developing an award winning, secure mobile app. You should focus upon clarity and conciseness more than length when determining what content to include in your paper. At a minimum, your white paper must include the following:1.An introduction or overview of mobile apps for digital government. Your overview should include examples of mobile apps which are recognized as being innovative and “best of category” for delivering government information and services to mobile devices. This introduction should be suitable for an executive audience.2.A separate section in which you discuss the federal government’s requirements and recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. This section should be written for non-technical managers; you will need to translate from tech-speak to manager-speak. Diagrams and pictures may be useful but, remember to include the appropriate in-text citations for the source (append to the figure caption).3.A separate section in which you discuss industry’s recommendations for security architectures and risk reduction for mobile app security.4.A section in which you present 5 or more best practice recommendations for building security into the new mobile app which will become next year’s entry into the Mobi-Gov awards contest. These recommendations should be presented as your “strategy” for “winning” the security evaluation category for mobile apps.Submit For Grading 1.Submit your white paper in MS Word format (.docx or .doc file) using the OPEN Data Assignment in your assignment folder. (Attach the file.)2.You must also submit your white paper to TurnItIn before the due date for this assignment.Additional Information1.Your white paper should use standard terms and definitions for cybersecurity concepts. The following sources are recommended:•ISACA Glossary http://www.isaca.org/pages/glossary.aspx •Guidelines on Security and Privacy in Public Cloud Computing http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-144.pdf  2.You are expected to credit your sources using in-text citations and reference list entries. Both your citations and your reference list entries must comply with APA 6th edition Style requirements. Failure to credit your sources will result in penalties as provided for under the university’s Academic Integrity policy. 3.Use APA 6th edition style (formatting) for the organization and appearance of the MS Word document that you submit to your assignment folder. This includes margins, section headings, and consistent use of fonts (Times New Roman 12 in black), paragraph styles (first line indent by ½ inch), and line spacing (double). Formatting requirements and examples are found under Course Resources > APA Resources. Your file should contain both a title page and a separate References page. Use page breaks to ensure that the title page and references page are separate from the body of the paper. 4.You are expected to write grammatically correct English in every assignment that you submit for grading. Do not turn in any work without (a) using spell check, (b) using grammar check, (c) verifying that your punctuation is correct and (d) reviewing your work for correct word usage and correctly structured sentences and paragraphs. These items are graded under Professionalism and constitute 15% of the assignment grade. CriteriaExcellentOutstandingAcceptableNeeds ImprovementNeeds Significant ImprovementMissing or UnacceptableIntroduction or Overview for Mobile Apps15 pointsProvided an excellent overview of mobile apps for digital government. Discussion included 5 or more examples of mobile apps which have been recognized as being innovative or “best of category” for delivering government information and services to mobile devices. The overview appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.14 pointsProvided an outstanding overview of mobile apps for digital government. Discussion included 3 or more examples of mobile apps which have been recognized as being innovative or “best of category” for delivering government information and services to mobile devices. The overview appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.13 pointsProvided an overview of mobile apps for digital government. Discussed the purpose of mobile apps from the federal government.  Included at least one example of a mobile app that is available from the federal government’s app store. The overview appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.11 pointsProvided an overview but the section lacked important details about federal government mobile apps. Information from authoritative sources was cited and used in the overview.4 pointsAttempted to provide an introduction to the paper but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources. 0 pointsThe introduction and/or overview sections of the paper were off topic. Federal Perspective on Mobile App Security20 pointsProvided an excellent overview of the federal government’s requirements and recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Explanations were written for non-technical managers and included at least three useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.18 pointsProvided an outstanding overview of the federal government’s requirements and recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Explanations were written for non-technical managers and included at least two useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.16 pointsProvided an overview of the federal government’s requirements and recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Included at one or more useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.14 pointsProvided a discussion of the federal government’s requirements or recommendations for mobil app security.Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.10 pointsProvided a discussion of mobile app security in the context of the federal government. The discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.0 pointsThis section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information aboutmobile app security in the context of the federal government. Industry Perspective on Mobile App Security20 pointsProvided an excellent overview of industry recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Explanations were written for non-technical managers and included at least three useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.18 pointsProvided an outstanding overview of industry recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Explanations were written for non-technical managers and included at least two useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.16 pointsProvided an overview of industry recommendations for mobile app security architectures and the associated design recommendations. Included at one or more useful diagrams or pictures with appropriate in-text citations for the source (appended to the figure caption). Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.14 pointsProvided a discussion of industry recommendations for mobil app security.Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.10 pointsProvided a discussion of mobile app security from industry’s perspective. The discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.0 pointsThis section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information aboutmobile app security from the industry perspective.Best Practice Recommendations for Mobile App Security15 pointsProvided an excellent discussion of best practice recommendations for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, availability, authenticity, and non-repudiation for Mobile Applications. Included 5 or more specific recommendations. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.14 pointsProvided an outstanding discussion of best practice recommendations for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, availability, authenticity, and non-repudiation for Mobile Applications. Included 4 or more specific recommendations. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.13 pointsProvided a discussion of best practice recommendations for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, availability, authenticity, and non-repudiation for Mobile Applications. Included 3 or more specific recommendations. Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.11 pointsDiscussion provided some information about best practices for ensuring security for Mobile Applications. Mentioned information obtained from authoritative sources.4 pointsDiscussion provided some information about best practices for ensuring security for Mobile Applications, but the lacked detail and/or was not supported by information from authoritative sources.0 pointsDid not address best practices for security for Mobile Applications.Addressed security issues using standard cybersecurity terminology5 pointsDemonstrated excellence in the integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study.4 pointsProvided an outstanding integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study.3 pointsIntegrated standard cybersecurity terminology into the into the case study2 pointsUsed standard cybersecurity terminology but this usage was not well integrated with the discussion.1 pointMisused standard cybersecurity terminology.0 pointsDid not integrate standard cybersecurity terminology into the discussion.APA Formatting for Citations and Reference List5 pointsWork contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are correctly formatted using the appropriate APA style for each type of resource.4 pointsWork contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. One or two minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.3 pointsWork contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. No more than 3 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.2 pointsWork has no more than three paragraphs with omissions of citations crediting sources for facts and information. Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited resources. Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.1 pointWork attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental failure to understand and apply the APA formatting standard as defined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.).0 pointsReference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for information used in the paper.Professionalism Part I: Organization & Appearance5 pointsSubmitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is appropriate to the assignment type.4 pointsSubmitted work has minor style or formatting flaws but still presents a professional appearance. Submitted work is well organized and appropriately uses color, fonts, and section headings (per the assignment’s directions).3 pointsOrganization and/or appearance of submitted work could be improved through better use of fonts, color, titles, headings, etc. OR Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Professional appearance could be improved.2 pointsSubmitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Organization and professional appearance need substantial improvement.1 pointSubmitted work meets minimum requirements but has major style and formatting errors. Work is disorganized and needs to be rewritten for readability and professional appearance.0 pointsSubmitted work is poorly organized and formatted. Writing and presentation are lacking in professional style and appearance. Work does not reflect college level writing skills.Professionalism Part II: Execution15 pointsNo formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors.14 pointsWork contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance.13 pointsErrors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work.11 pointsSubmitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance.4 pointsSubmitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage.0 pointsSubmitted work is poorly executed OR does not reflect college level work.Overall ScoreExcellent90 or moreOutstanding80 or moreAcceptable70 or moreNeeds Improvement56 or moreNeeds Significant Improvement36 or moreMissing or Unacceptable0 or more