Special versus general protection and attack of two assets

• Authors: HAUSKEN Hausken
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Two independent assets are analysed, being subject to special and general protection and attack, supplementing earlier research on individual and overarching protection and attack. Sixteen analytical solutions are developed to examine how a defender and attacker choose either two special efforts, one general effort, or one special effort and one general effort. The latter occurs when the special unit effort cost for one asset is lower than that of the other asset and the general unit effort cost. The article provides a tool for each player to realise which of these three options it should choose when facing an opponent who also chooses between these three options. The solutions are explained and illustrated with examples. The article focuses on specialization versus generalization of effort which is of paramount importance.

Keywords

EN

special effort; general effort; protection; defence attack; reliability; vulnerability; independent assets; safety; security; terrorism

• Publisher: Politechnika Wrocławska. Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej
• Journal: Operations Research and Decisions
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 29
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 53-93

Contributors

author

HAUSKEN Hausken

• Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Postboks 8600 Forus, Norway

References

• AVENHAUS R., CANTY M.J., Playing for Time: A Sequential Inspection Game, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2005, 167, 475–492.
• AZAIEZ M.N., BIER V.M., Optimal Resource Allocation for Security in Reliability Systems, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2007, 181, 773–786.
• BIER V.M., HAPHURIWAT N., MENOYO J., ZIMMERMAN R., CULPEN A.M., Optimal Resource Allocation for Defense of Targets Based on Differing Measures of Attractiveness, Risk Anal., 2008, 28, 763–770.
• BIER V.M., NAGARAJ A., ABHICHANDANI V., Protection of Simple Series and Parallel Systems with Components of Different Values, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2005, 87, 315–323.
• BOROS E., FEDZHORA L., KANTOR P.B., SAEGER K., STROUD P., A Large‐Scale Linear Programming Model for Finding Optimal Container Inspection Strategies, Naval Res. Log. (NRL), 2009, 56, 404– 420.
• BROWN G., CARLYLE M., SALMERÓN J., WOOD K., Defending Critical Infrastructure, Interfaces, 2006, 36, 530–544.
• GOLALIKHANI M., ZHUANG J., Modeling Arbitrary Layers of Continuous-Level Defenses in Facing with Strategic Attackers, Risk Anal., 2011, 31, 533–547.
• GUAN P.Q., HE M.L., ZHUANG J., HORA S.C., Modeling a Multitarget Attacker–Defender Game with Budget Constraints, Dec. Anal., 2017, 14, 87–107.
• HAPHURIWAT N., BIER V.M., Trade-Offs Between Target Hardening and Overarching Protection, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2011, 213, 320–328.
• HAUSKEN K., Strategic Defense and Attack for Reliability Systems, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2008, 93, 1740–1750.
• HAUSKEN K., Strategic Defense and Attack for Series and Parallel Reliability Systems, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2008, 186, 856–881.
• HAUSKEN K., Protecting Complex Infrastructures Against Multiple Strategic Attackers, Int. J. Syst. Sci., 2011, 42, 11–29.
• HAUSKEN K., Individual Versus Overarching Protection and Attack of Assets, Central Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2014, 22, 89–112.
• HAUSKEN K., 2017, Special Versus General Protection and Attack of Parallel and Series Components, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 165, 239–256.
• HAUSKEN K., BIER V.M., ZHUANG J., Defending Against Terrorism, Natural Disaster, and All Hazards, [In:] V.M. Bier, M.N. Azaiez (Eds.), Game Theoretic Risk Analysis of Security Threats, Springer, 2009.
• HAUSKEN K., LEVITIN G., Efficiency of Even Separation of Parallel Elements with Variable Contest Intensity, Risk Anal., 2008, 28, 1477–1486.
• HAUSKEN K., LEVITIN G., Minmax Defense Strategy for Complex Multi-State Systems, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2009, 94, 577–587.
• HAUSKEN K., LEVITIN G., Review of Systems Defense and Attack Models, Int. J. Perform. Eng., 2012, 8, 355–366.
• HAUSKEN K., ZHUANG J., The Timing and Deterrence of Terrorist Attacks due to Exogenous Dynamics, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 2012, 63, 726–735.
• HAUSKEN K., Combined Series and Parallel Systems Subject to Individual versus Overarching Defense and Attack, Asia-Pacific J. Oper. Res., 2013, 30 (2), 1250056.
• KORCZAK E., LEVITIN G., Survivability of Systems Under Multiple Factor Impact, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2007, 92, 269–274.
• LEVITIN G., Optimal Multilevel Protection in Series-Parallel Systems, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2003, 81, 93–102.
• LEVITIN G., Optimal Defense Strategy Against Intentional Attacks, IEEE Trans. Rel., 2007, 56, 148–157.
• LEVITIN G., HAUSKEN K., Intelligence and Impact Contests in Systems with Fake Targets, Def. Secur. Anal., 2009, 25, 157–173.
• LEVITIN G., HAUSKEN K., Intelligence and Impact Contests in Systems with Redundancy, False Targets, and Partial Protection, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2009, 94, 1927–1941.
• LEVITIN G., HAUSKEN K., Individual versus Overarching Protection Against Strategic Attacks, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 2012, 63, 969–981.
• LEVITIN G., HAUSKEN K., DAI Y., Individual vs, Overarching Protection for Minimizing the Expected Damage Caused by an Attack, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2013, 119, 117–125.
• LEVITIN G., HAUSKEN K., DAI Y., Optimal Defense with Variable Number of Overarching and Individual Protections, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2014, 123, 81–90.
• LIN CHEN J., LENEUTRE J., A Game Theoretical Framework on Intrusion Detection in Heterogeneous Networks, Inf. Foren. Secur., IEEE Trans., 2009, 4, 165–178.
• MCLAY L., LLOYD J., NIMAN E., Interdicting Nuclear Material on Cargo Containers Using Knapsack Problem Models, Ann. Oper. Res., 2011, 187, 185–205.
• MICHAUD D., APOSTOLAKIS G.E., Methodology for Ranking the Elements of Water-Supply Networks, J. Infrast. Syst., 2006, 12, 230–242.
• PATTERSON S.A., APOSTOLAKIS G.E., Identification of Critical Locations Across Multiple Infrastructures for Terrorist Actions, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2007, 92, 1183–1203.
• PENG R., GUO L., LEVITIN G., MO H., WANG W., Maintenance Versus Individual and Overarching Protections for Parallel Systems, Qual. Techn. Quant. Manage., 2014, 11, 353–362.
• POWELL R., Defending against Terrorist Attacks with Limited Resources, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 2007, 101, 527–541.
• SHAN X., ZHUANG J., Modeling Cumulative Defensive Resource Allocation Against a Strategic Attacker in a Multi-Period Multi-Target Sequential Game, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2018, 179, 12–26.
• SKAPERDAS S., Contest Success Functions, Econ. Theory, 1996, 7, 283–290.
• TULLOCK G., Efficient Rent-Seeking, [In:] J.M. Buchanan, R.D. Tollison, G. Tullock (Eds.), Toward a Theory of the Rent-Seeking Society, University Press, College Station, Texas A. & M., 1980.
• ZHANG J., ZHUANG J., Modeling a Multi-Target Attacker–Defender Game with Multiple Attack Types, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2019, 185, 465–475.
• ZHANG J., ZHUANG J., JOSE V.R.R., The Role of Risk Preferences in a Multi-Target Defender–Attacker Resource Allocation Game, Rel. Eng. Syst. Safe., 2018, 169, 95–104.
• ZHUANG J., BIER V.M., Balancing Terrorism and Natural Disasters: Defensive Strategy with Endogenous Attacker Effort, Oper. Res., 2007, 55, 976–991.

Identifiers

DOI

10.37190/ord190404