Difference between revisions of "Template:Article of the week"

From LIMSWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Updated article of the week text)
(Updated article of the week text)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="float: left; margin: 0.5em 0.9em 0.4em 0em;">[[File:Tab2 Haugsbakken NordicJOfSciTechStud2018 6-1.png|240px]]</div>
+
<div style="float: left; margin: 0.5em 0.9em 0.4em 0em;">[[File:Fig1 Schabacker FrontBioengBiotech2019 7.jpg|240px]]</div>
'''"[[Journal:What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?|What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?]]"'''
+
'''"[[Journal:Assessing cyberbiosecurity vulnerabilities and infrastructure resilience|Assessing cyberbiosecurity vulnerabilities and infrastructure resilience]]"'''
  
In recent years, several Norwegian public organizations have introduced enterprise social media platforms (ESMPs). The rationale for their implementation pertains to a goal of improving internal communications and work processes in organizational life. Such objectives can be attained on the condition that employees adopt the platform and embrace the practice of sharing. Although sharing work on ESMPs can bring benefits, making sense of the practice of sharing constitutes a challenge. In this regard, the paper performs an analysis on a case whereby an ESMP was introduced in a Norwegian public organization. The analytical focus is on the challenges and experiences of making sense of the practice of sharing. The research results show that users faced challenges in making sense of sharing. ('''[[Journal:What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?|Full article...]]''')<br />
+
The convergence of advances in [[biotechnology]] with [[laboratory automation]], access to data, and computational biology has democratized biotechnology and accelerated the development of new therapeutics. However, increased access to biotechnology in the digital age has also introduced additional security concerns and ultimately spawned the new discipline of cyberbiosecurity, which encompasses [[cybersecurity]], cyber-physical security, and biosecurity considerations. With the emergence of this new discipline comes the need for a logical, repeatable, and shared approach for evaluating facility and system vulnerabilities to cyberbiosecurity threats. In this paper, we outline the foundation of an assessment framework for cyberbiosecurity, accounting for both security and resilience factors in the physical and cyber domains. This is a unique problem set, yet despite the complexity of the cyberbiosecurity field in terms of operations and governance, previous experience developing and implementing physical and cyber assessments applicable to a wide spectrum of critical infrastructure sectors provides a validated point of departure for a cyberbiosecurity assessment framework.   ('''[[Journal:Assessing cyberbiosecurity vulnerabilities and infrastructure resilience|Full article...]]''')<br />
 
<br />
 
<br />
 
''Recently featured'':
 
''Recently featured'':
 +
: ▪ [[Journal:What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?|What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?]]
 
: ▪ [[Journal:Cyberbiosecurity: An emerging new discipline to help safeguard the bioeconomy|Cyberbiosecurity: An emerging new discipline to help safeguard the bioeconomy]]
 
: ▪ [[Journal:Cyberbiosecurity: An emerging new discipline to help safeguard the bioeconomy|Cyberbiosecurity: An emerging new discipline to help safeguard the bioeconomy]]
 
: ▪ [[Journal:Cyberbiosecurity: A new perspective on protecting U.S. food and agricultural system|Cyberbiosecurity: A new perspective on protecting U.S. food and agricultural system]]
 
: ▪ [[Journal:Cyberbiosecurity: A new perspective on protecting U.S. food and agricultural system|Cyberbiosecurity: A new perspective on protecting U.S. food and agricultural system]]
: ▪ [[Journal:DAQUA-MASS: An ISO 8000-61-based data quality management methodology for sensor data|DAQUA-MASS: An ISO 8000-61-based data quality management methodology for sensor data]]
 

Latest revision as of 16:48, 10 June 2019

Fig1 Schabacker FrontBioengBiotech2019 7.jpg

"Assessing cyberbiosecurity vulnerabilities and infrastructure resilience"

The convergence of advances in biotechnology with laboratory automation, access to data, and computational biology has democratized biotechnology and accelerated the development of new therapeutics. However, increased access to biotechnology in the digital age has also introduced additional security concerns and ultimately spawned the new discipline of cyberbiosecurity, which encompasses cybersecurity, cyber-physical security, and biosecurity considerations. With the emergence of this new discipline comes the need for a logical, repeatable, and shared approach for evaluating facility and system vulnerabilities to cyberbiosecurity threats. In this paper, we outline the foundation of an assessment framework for cyberbiosecurity, accounting for both security and resilience factors in the physical and cyber domains. This is a unique problem set, yet despite the complexity of the cyberbiosecurity field in terms of operations and governance, previous experience developing and implementing physical and cyber assessments applicable to a wide spectrum of critical infrastructure sectors provides a validated point of departure for a cyberbiosecurity assessment framework. (Full article...)

Recently featured:

What is the meaning of sharing: Informing, being informed or information overload?
Cyberbiosecurity: An emerging new discipline to help safeguard the bioeconomy
Cyberbiosecurity: A new perspective on protecting U.S. food and agricultural system