Search

We introduce a mathematical model to describe how operational capabilities are affected when a nation closes their national networks. When considering defensive capabilities, we define capability as a probability for denying adversarial operations in a friendly network so that the overall system (Cf. critical infrastructure) remains operative. We define an operation as a set of actions that are conducted against one specific subsystem. The overall system is considered to be operative when at least predefined number (M) of subsystems is operative. The probability of having exactly k operative subsystems out of N is given by the probability mass function of the Poisson binomial distribution. The probability of subsystem i being operative depends on whether it is under attack or not. Under normal conditions, the subsystem is operative with a certain probability. When the subsystem is under attack, the probability of a successful computer network defense operation of the subsystem is described as a probability for denying the operation in at least one of its step. Different subsystems are assumed to be independent. The assumption of independent subsystems is made in order to describe the solution in a closed form. It is acknowledged that a more sophisticated model is required in order to describe the effects of a closed national network in more detail. Nevertheless, the model proposed in this article extends the analysis of how a closed national network affects the operational capabilities in the overall system level. The closing process is a well-documented course of development as Russia is likely to implement 'RuNet 2020'. The model may be used to form and improve situation awareness as the process evolves. In order to further extend the analysis it is likely that one has to consider subsystems individually and allow them to be interdependent. Furthermore, then one has to consider also effects hierarchically, introduce network modelling and study time dependency. However, one may utilize parts of this study when further deepening the analysis as described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modelling and simulation is a cost-effective tool to compare and explore possibilities of different military technologies, equipment and tactical using practices. Information warfare can affect initial situations or outcomes of the combat and tactics to be modelled. This leads to demands for studying alternative tactical and technical situations as well as related model and software development and user education. However, the education and development of new software needs realistic test cases and resources for teaching, improving and developing corresponding software. Learning is more motivated if the teaching methods can utilise corresponding test cases as an introduction to software use. By combining research and education on the topic together, experiences and information exchange on modelling and simulation between research specialists and students can be done effectively. The mentioned facts encouraged us to combine previously separately organised research workshops and education events together into a combined 5th Sandis workshop. The workshop was held in 2012 as a part of Advanced Technology and Military Acquisition Course (ATMAC). The workshop provided a one-week package in operational analysis in the study package in operational analysis methods, which is a total of 4 credits. The research part of the workshop was aimed to deal with two different case studies and testing of a new version of the simulation software. The aim of the educational part of the workshop was to introduce tactical combat simulations with the Sandis software for comparative studies including studies with or without electronic warfare (EW). The research parts were focused on development of indirect fire models in realistic terrain and combat casualty evacuation studies. These studies provided deeper understanding and some new scientific results of the topics. The third goal was to test a new version of the software. Experiences and feedback of the participants showed us that by combining research and education into a common workshop, both aspects win. This kind of a working method seemed to provide intelligent and motivating atmosphere and the focus of the participants were on the subjects under consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]