IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v30y2010i12p1737-1743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reasons for Secrecy and Deception in Homeland‐Security Resource Allocation

Author

Listed:
  • Jun Zhuang
  • Vicki M. Bier

Abstract

In this article, we explore reasons that a defender might prefer secrecy or deception about her defensive resource allocations, rather than disclosure, in a homeland‐security context. Our observations not only summarize and synthesize the results of existing game‐theoretic work, but also provide intuitions about promising future research directions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jun Zhuang & Vicki M. Bier, 2010. "Reasons for Secrecy and Deception in Homeland‐Security Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1737-1743, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:12:p:1737-1743
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01455.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01455.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01455.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Powell, Robert, 2007. "Allocating Defensive Resources with Private Information about Vulnerability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 799-809, November.
    2. Vicki M. Bier, 2007. "Choosing What to Protect," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 607-620, June.
    3. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Protection vs. false targets in series systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(5), pages 973-981.
    4. Ian Ayres & Steven D. Levitt, 1998. "Measuring Positive Externalities from Unobservable Victim Precaution: An Empirical Analysis of Lojack," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(1), pages 43-77.
    5. Jun Zhuang & Vicki M. Bier, 2007. "Balancing Terrorism and Natural Disasters---Defensive Strategy with Endogenous Attacker Effort," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 976-991, October.
    6. Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 2004. "The Politician and the Judge: Accountability in Government," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
    7. Steven J. Brams, 1977. "Deception in 2 × 2 Games," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 2(2), pages 171-203, February.
    8. Zhuang, Jun & Bier, Vicki M. & Alagoz, Oguzhan, 2010. "Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 409-418, June.
    9. Oliver Board, 2002. "The Deception of the Greeks: Generalizing the Information Structure of Extensive Form Games," Economics Series Working Papers 137, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    10. Gilat Levy, 2007. "Decision–Making Procedures for Committees of Careerist Experts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 306-310, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wei Wang & Francesco Di Maio & Enrico Zio, 2019. "Adversarial Risk Analysis to Allocate Optimal Defense Resources for Protecting Cyber–Physical Systems from Cyber Attacks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2766-2785, December.
    2. Zhang, Xiaoxiong & Ye, Yanqing & Tan, Yuejin, 2020. "How to protect a genuine target against an attacker trying to detect false targets," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 553(C).
    3. Xiaojun Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2013. "Cost of Equity in Homeland Security Resource Allocation in the Face of a Strategic Attacker," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1083-1099, June.
    4. Tania Wallis & Rafał Leszczyna, 2022. "EE-ISAC—Practical Cybersecurity Solution for the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Jesus Rios & David Rios Insua, 2012. "Adversarial Risk Analysis for Counterterrorism Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 894-915, May.
    6. Vineet M. Payyappalli & Jun Zhuang & Victor Richmond R. Jose, 2017. "Deterrence and Risk Preferences in Sequential Attacker–Defender Games with Continuous Efforts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2229-2245, November.
    7. Olive Emil Wetter & Valentino Wüthrich, 2015. "“What is dear to you?” Survey of beliefs regarding protection of critical infrastructure against terrorism," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 185-198, September.
    8. Natalie M. Scala & Allison C. Reilly & Paul L. Goethals & Michel Cukier, 2019. "Risk and the Five Hard Problems of Cybersecurity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2119-2126, October.
    9. Nageswara S. V. Rao & Stephen W. Poole & Chris Y. T. Ma & Fei He & Jun Zhuang & David K. Y. Yau, 2016. "Defense of Cyber Infrastructures Against Cyber‐Physical Attacks Using Game‐Theoretic Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 694-710, April.
    10. Yanling Chang & Alan Erera & Chelsea White, 2015. "Value of information for a leader–follower partially observed Markov game," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 129-153, December.
    11. Peiqiu Guan & Jun Zhuang, 2016. "Modeling Resources Allocation in Attacker‐Defender Games with “Warm Up” CSF," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 776-791, April.
    12. Michael Greenberg & Karen Lowrie, 2019. "Vicki Bier: A More Sensible Way to View Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 744-748, April.
    13. Schlicher, Loe & Lurkin, Virginie, 2024. "Fighting pickpocketing using a choice-based resource allocation model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(2), pages 580-595.
    14. Brian A Jackson & David R Frelinger & Jennifer Kavanagh & Brett A Wallace, 2021. "Adaptation by intelligent adversaries to defensive measures: framing adaptation options and demonstrating assessment of attacker preferences using proxy intelligence data," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 18(2), pages 61-85, April.
    15. Kjell Hausken & Jonathan W. Welburn & Jun Zhuang, 2024. "A Review of Attacker–Defender Games and Cyber Security," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, August.
    16. Jie Xu & Jun Zhuang, 2016. "Modeling costly learning and counter-learning in a defender-attacker game with private defender information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 271-289, January.
    17. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2016. "Quantifying Adversary Capabilities to Inform Defensive Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 756-775, April.
    18. Meilin He & Laura Devine & Jun Zhuang, 2018. "Perspectives on Cybersecurity Information Sharing among Multiple Stakeholders Using a Decision‐Theoretic Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 215-225, February.
    19. Santing He & Mingchu Li & Runfa Zhang, 2024. "Signaling Security Games with Attack Planner Deception," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-28, August.
    20. David Rios Insua & David Banks & Jesus Rios, 2016. "Modeling Opponents in Adversarial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 742-755, April.
    21. González-Ortega, Jorge & Ríos Insua, David & Cano, Javier, 2019. "Adversarial risk analysis for bi-agent influence diagrams: An algorithmic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1085-1096.
    22. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Technology adoption for airport security: Modeling public disclosure and secrecy in an attacker-defender game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jie Xu & Jun Zhuang, 2016. "Modeling costly learning and counter-learning in a defender-attacker game with private defender information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 271-289, January.
    2. Paulson, Elisabeth C. & Linkov, Igor & Keisler, Jeffrey M., 2016. "A game theoretic model for resource allocation among countermeasures with multiple attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 610-622.
    3. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Mehmet Gümüs, 2015. "On the value of terrorist’s private information in a government’s defensive resource allocation problem," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 533-555, June.
    4. Insua, Insua Rios & Rios, Jesus & Banks, David, 2009. "Adversarial Risk Analysis," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(486), pages 841-854.
    5. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    6. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    7. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2022. "On the adoption of new technology to enhance counterterrorism measures: An attacker–defender game with risk preferences," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    8. F He & J Zhuang, 2012. "Modelling ‘contracts’ between a terrorist group and a government in a sequential game," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(6), pages 790-809, June.
    9. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2018. "Modeling cumulative defensive resource allocation against a strategic attacker in a multi-period multi-target sequential game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 12-26.
    10. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Technology adoption for airport security: Modeling public disclosure and secrecy in an attacker-defender game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    11. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2013. "Information Security Investment When Hackers Disseminate Knowledge," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 352-368, December.
    12. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Choosing what to protect when attacker resources and asset valuations are uncertain," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 24(3), pages 23-44.
    13. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2011. "Target-Hardening Decisions Based on Uncertain Multiattribute Terrorist Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 286-302, December.
    14. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2013. "Is it wise to leave some false targets unprotected?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 176-186.
    15. Kjell Hausken & Jonathan W. Welburn & Jun Zhuang, 2024. "A Review of Attacker–Defender Games and Cyber Security," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, August.
    16. Nikoofal, Mohammad E. & Zhuang, Jun, 2015. "On the value of exposure and secrecy of defense system: First-mover advantage vs. robustness," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 320-330.
    17. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "False targets vs. redundancy in homogeneous parallel systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 588-595.
    18. Zhang, Chi & Ramirez-Marquez, José Emmanuel & Wang, Jianhui, 2015. "Critical infrastructure protection using secrecy – A discrete simultaneous game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 212-221.
    19. Pourakbar, M. & Zuidwijk, R.A., 2018. "The role of customs in securing containerized global supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 331-340.
    20. Xiaojun (Gene) Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection---A Three-Stage Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 43-62, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:12:p:1737-1743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.