Information protection - A comparative analysis of popular models

Shahid Naseem, Zeashan Hameed Khan, Muhammad Irfan Abid

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present a comparative analysis between three models i.e. Lord's model, Hampshire's child trust model and cognitive agent model for protecting information before sharing it to others. For this purpose, we have studied the factors of each model that are used for sharing sensitive information to other modules in the models. Lord's model contains four factors i.e. open, honest, consent and seeks advice for developing 'trust' to whom the sensitive information is going to be shared. According to the Lord's model, we must ensure that what we are sharing with others, keep in mind the protection of our as well as others. Hampshire's children trust model contains two factors i.e. the consent and legal rights for sharing sensitive information to others. For information protection in cognitive science, cognitive agent is based multiple factors i.e. implicit and explicit learning, Situatory responses along with some cognitive correlates factors such as intention, perception, motivation and emotions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)243-250
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Computing and Digital Systems
Volume7
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 International Journal of Computing and Digital Systems. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Cognition
  • Consent
  • Emotions
  • Hampshire
  • Motivation
  • Perception
  • Sensitive

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Information Systems
  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Computer Networks and Communications
  • Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Management of Technology and Innovation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Information protection - A comparative analysis of popular models'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this