Networks Security Management Term Paper

Pages: 10 (3098 words)  ·  Style: APA  ·  Bibliography Sources: 6  ·  Level: Master's  ·  Topic: Business - Management  ·  Buy This Paper


[. . .] The scanner is then entitled to determine whether the ports are on or off if the ports respond.

In this regard, it is perusable to identify the nature of the merits and demerits associated with this approach. Firstly, it positive to note that vulnerability management is highly scalable, Scanning takes place from a centralized location which is in this case distributed from a different location of the aggregate network architect. Secondly, the technology does provide the administrator with networked devices, which are not limited to a compatible platform. Thirdly, the technology is highly scalable since the administrator can have a realistic view of risk production environment. Finally, the technology does provide incremental information that regardless of the platform, the administrator can assess all resource since ports and protocols are configured in line with the administrator requirements. However, the system possesses challenging merits on aggregate. Nikolaidis (2003, pp. 6) argues that the technology lacks proper validation since basic system will naturally prevent adverse effects. Secondly, the network infrastructure might fail to respond to technical challenges. In this case, scanning will happen be of slow speeds than expected. Thirdly, if proper scanning is not conducted agents can detect attacks on the vulnerability backbone, and in this case, the host is not in a better position to provide better counter measurements of a system vulnerability attack.


According to the presentation analyzed above, it is good to note that the two systems courtesy of threat management and vulnerability managers applies diverse approaches in prevention. Ideally, one will notice that the threat management approach seeks to manage the prevailing threats especially at the DMZ while the vulnerability management focuses on the prevention scope. In threat management, the administrator applies a plethora of analysis, which is potentially different from the vulnerability attacks. The purpose of vulnerability attacks is monitoring whether ports are uplink and whether packets are originating from a given I.P address that is knowledgeable to the networks.

Besides, vulnerability management differs significantly from the threat management since network prevention is the key in vulnerability management. In contrast, threat management focuses on in GUI driven application that manages all process in a network. In fact, the complexity of vulnerability management is based on the user ability to detect malware, spam, viruses, Trojan horses, and spyware, which are mounted on the host machine and that business, is only executable if the system has a computer-aided application. Threat management focuses on the use of complex software. As assessed earlier, the management prefers the development of an independent operating system since this approach is capable of overriding any types of attacks.

In contrast, vulnerability management presents a sophisticated approach, which entirely uses packet-sniffing system to detect whether ports are coming from legitimate sources. Although the system is driven from a software application, it is prudent to note that the system is largely a hardware approach and not a software approach. In fact, the sniffer itself is a hardware approach that has the ability of pinging and banking different computers on the database. In networking, complex of approaches are applied to determine how each of hardware relates to each other. Among the devices that vulnerability management seeks to overrides is the desktop computer, server-side computers, switches, and all nature of routers be it on the inside platform or the border platform. Therefore, in this regard, it is good to note that threat management and vulnerability are significantly different in how they are applied.

Besides, both systems have specified targets of attack complexity in similarities exist. For instance, in Denial of Service (DOS) attacks, threat management seems a finite system and technically pragmatic as compared to other forms of management. In addition, other similar attacks are password-Based Attacks and Data modification which are chiefly management by threat management and cannot be managed by vulnerability management. However, on the other hand, vulnerability management has a series of responses that can be applied to mitigate attacks that threat management cannot manage. For instance, identity spoofing are technically special hacker programs that construct ghost IP packets. It is good to note that the I.P addresses originate from falsely I.P from tools such as I.P masking. These threats will naturally challenge an administrator since the approach only focuses on data modification and can respond with immediate effect in terms of gross attacks.


Why They Need to Be in Independent

Hackers have intensified their approach in relation to attacks. In addition, in modern day organizations, corporations have become less conscious and more tolerant to hacking protocols. The combined approach of this has expanded the vulnerability concept since I.T administrators are less aware of the possible mitigation strategy, and according to research, most mitigation often end at the anti-virus phase, which is not responsive enough to mitigate the nature of attacks. In this regard, computing standards currently used can only be said to be demise and do not respond to the real problems of the hacker. Hackers have become so sophisticated and so networked that they even attempted to overrides any system in the world.

Goldstein (2010, p. 44) quotes the intensity of hackers in that even young girls of ten years can perform a hacking better than they can conclude a school assignment. Hacking resources; for instance, the 2600 Hacker Quarterly have become so widely published and so widely used and part of these publication attempt to approach hacking in a multilayered segment concerning. Ideally, hackers often operate in teams of which there are specialized. In the OSI application, different hacker will naturally attack based on their specialized. In fact, each attack charges a strong underground business for a given attack. Consider a TCP / IP stack, hacker A who is girl presenting troubled on location somewhere will call for help and while calling and aiding hacker B. will attack the network using the prevailing system. One of them is HTTP and others could be FTP or SMTP. There are seven layers of the OSI model, and all are vulnerable to attacks. They include the physical layer; seconded by data link layer, network layer, transport layer, session layer, presentation and application layer. The seven layers use various technologies. A common anti-virus will not detect their intrusive nature.

In response to this, it is prudent to apply a complexity of the system, which will adequately respond to the problem. In fact, mitigating an attack is a hybrid application of hardware and software measures. The application of these two systems is parallel in line that an attack will attempt to manipulate systems with intent of overriding the administration platform. In response to these, the threat management naturally comes from the session layer, presentation and application layers. A hacker target a threat management bank will naturally penetrate the administration by overriding the first four layers. The hacker will assess the SQL database, and create a ghost account, which now the threat management is not in a position to manage. Conversely, a hacker through phishing obtained details of a given network, the hacker will now attempt to override the four layers, and the newly acquired details will naturally be important in the logs panel.

Now applying hybrid application of the two approaches is an integral since attacks will be mitigated from the hardware and management side. The above description further focused on the management of a network on hardware and software side although it is good to note that the vulnerability management, software is vital in managing the hardware. Conversely, the threat approach appeals decisive since, the system will naturally present a given operating system, and intrusion can only be successful if there is improper management of the network.


In light with this comparison, it is good to note that hacking is a sophisticated application that seeks to overrides the basic systems of a network. The analysis has examined the inherent dangers of having a poorly designated by using one approach. However, for the purpose of authentic responses to hacking, it is good to identify that hackers will naturally come with all sought of approach. For instance, this research has not identified the server room intrusion. Therefore, in this regard, concern should be directed on the possibility of applying several technologies. A good example of technologies is automatic data backup and data destruction. Besides, the attacked platform should automatically launch counter-attacks by configuring specially made viruses and other systems. In summary, the hybrid application of threat and vulnerable management in security is responsive is considerably responsive to extend the security perimeter.


Andre, M. (2008). RSA: Sinowal Trojan stole vast volume of data. Computer Fraud & Security,

2008(11), 4.

Ariba, Y., Gouaisbaut, F., & Labit, Y. (2009). Feedback control for router management and TCP/IP network stability. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORK AND SERVICE

Management, 6(4), 255-266.

Eaton, J. (2001). Management Communication: The Threat of Groupthink. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(4), 183-192.

Gandotra, V.,… [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  Buy the full, 10-page paper:  $26.88


2.  Buy & remove for 30 days:  $38.47


3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)


4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

Security Planning and Assessment Thesis

Security Management Defining an Effective Enterprise Research Paper

Network Management System Assessment

Computer Network Security -- Information Assurance Issues Essay

Security Self-Assessment Coyote Systems Security Self-Assessment Organization Thesis

View 999 other related papers  >>

Cite This Term Paper:

APA Format

Networks Security Management.  (2013, November 30).  Retrieved February 23, 2019, from

MLA Format

"Networks Security Management."  30 November 2013.  Web.  23 February 2019. <>.

Chicago Format

"Networks Security Management."  November 30, 2013.  Accessed February 23, 2019.