skip to main content
10.1145/3524304.3524327acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicscaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Model for Assessment Information Security Awareness Level for Data Stewardship by Understanding the Context of Use

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 June 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

The role of data stewardship satisfies various requirement for the users, employee or staff to provide necessary awareness in ensuring information security strategy take place accordingly. It relates to have properly understand the definition and standard across the organization in term of quality, accuracy, workflows, usage, compliance, format and attribute of content and metadata. Unfortunately, many organization have neglected the importance of data stewardship as the assistance for leveraging the valuable asset of data at the optimization capacity. One of advantages that can be generated automatically related to improve the awareness of relevant party within the environment in protecting the information assets based on policy implemented. This study identifies the relationship by accessing data stewardship with the awareness campaign strategy through security awareness domain and resources (SADAR) framework. The study compare between the utilization in the banking industry by using enterprise resource planning (ERP) and in the education with open platform of database management system (DBMS).

References

  1. E.F. Monk and B.J. Wagner, “Concept In Enterprise Resource Planning”. 4th Edition. United States of America: Cengage Learning, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. F. Mahar, S.I. Ali, A,K. Jumani, and M.O. Khan, “ERP System Implementation: Planning Management and Administration Issues”. Indian J. of Science and Technology 13(01): 1-22, 2020. DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.338.152Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. A.R. Ahlan, M. Lubis, and A.R. Lubis, “Information Security Awareness at the Knowledge-Based Institution: Its Antecedents and Measures”. Inf. Systems International Con., pp. 361-373, Elsevier B.V. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.12.151Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J.A. O'Brien and Marakas, “Managing Infrastructure for Information”. New York: McGraw-Hill (9th edition), 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. G. Vanderer, “Security Awareness and Social Responsibility”. 10th Jubilee IEEE Int. Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics, pp. 345-348, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. P.K. Sari and N. Trianasari, “Information Security Awareness Measurement with Confirmatory Factor Analysis”. Int. Symposium on Technology Management and Emerging Technologies, 218-223, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. H.A. Kruger and W.D. Kearney. “A Prototype for Assessing Information Security Awareness”. Computers & Security, 25, 289-296, (2006).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Symantec. “Internet Security Threat Report Volume 24”, February 2019. White Paper.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. E. Riadi, “Statistik SEM - Structural Equation Modeling dengan LISREL”. Yogyakarta: ANDI Publisher, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. A. Ghasemi and S. Zahediasl. “Normality Tests for Statistical Analysis: A Guide for Non Statisticians”. Int. J. Endocrinol Metab. 10(2), 486-489, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. D. Oztuna, A.H. Elhan and E. Tuccar. “Investigation of four different normality tests in terms of type 1 error rate and power under different distributions”. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences 36(3), 171–6, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. H.J. Thode, “Testing for normality”. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. D.J. Steinskog, “A cautionary note on the use of the Kolmogorov Smirnov test for normality”. American Meteor Soc. 135, 1151–1157, 2007. DOI: 10.1175/MWR3326.1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. C. Fornell and D.F. Larcker, “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. J.F. Hair, W.C. Black, B.J. Babin, and R.E. Anderson, “Multivariate data analysis”. (7th ed), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. V. Grimm and S.F. Railsback, “Pattern-oriented modelling: a ‘multi-scope’ for predictive systems ecology”. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 367(1586), 298–310, 2012. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. B. Edmonds, , “Different modelling purposes”. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 22(3), 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. M. Guerini and A. Moneta, “A method for agent-based models validation”. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 82, 125–141, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jedc.2017.06.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. G.T. Broeke and H. Tobi, “Mapping validity and validation in modelling for interdisciplinary research”. Qual. Quant. PMC7677449 Nov. 2020. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-020-01073-8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. S.A. Livingston, “Test Reliability-Basic Concepts. Research Memorandum ETS RM-18-01”. White Report 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. R.H. Toczydlowski, , “Poor Data Stewardship will Hinder Global Genetic Diversity Surveillance”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(34): e2107934118, 2021. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2107934118Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. M. Albani and I. Maggio. “Long time data series and data stewardship reference model”. Big Earth Data 4(4), Oct. 2020. DOI: 10.1080/20964471.2020.1800893Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. G. Peng. “The State of Assessing Data Stewardship Maturity – An Overview”. Data Science Journal 17(44), 2018. DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2018-007Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Suchanek and R. Pergl. “Data Stewardship Wizard for Open Science”. Data a znalosti & WIKT 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. R.R. Downs, R.E. Duerr, D.J. Hills and H.K. Ramapriyan. “Data Stewardship in the Earth Sciences”. D-Lib Magazine 21(7/8). DOI: 10.1045/july2015-downsGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICSCA '22: Proceedings of the 2022 11th International Conference on Software and Computer Applications
    February 2022
    224 pages
    ISBN:9781450385770
    DOI:10.1145/3524304

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 6 June 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)23
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format