“Some risks that are thought to be unknown, are not unknown. With some foresight and critical thought, some risks that at first glance may seem unforeseen, can in fact be foreseen. Armed with the right set of tools, procedures, knowledge, and insight, light can be shed on variables that lead to risk, allowing us to manage them.” – Daniel Wagner
Adverse – events, situations, incidents, reactions, experiences, and circumstances – represent rank manifestations of risk in the extended arenas of occupational, professional, social and personal aspects of human lives. Thinkers and analysts perceive these as threats that could impinge on the ordered functioning of systems, methods, operations, networks, and processes. Threats bear potential to generate various grades of impact on different types of processions – such as unfolding/ongoing narratives. Therefore, an analytical approach to such instances of adversity remains encased in techniques widely labeled as threat modeling; these represent “a risk-based approach to designing secure systems. Such modeling hinges on identifying the various manifestations of threat in order to develop mitigations to the same.”
Consequently, different grades of analysts endorse variant approaches to the idea of threat modeling; these individuals could ideate to develop the components (and mechanics) – of threat mitigation systems, methods, and techniques – inside the expanse of flowchart diagrams, or flowchart-based illustrations.
Defining the contours of a potential threat – and identifying the agency (or sequence) of possible events that could comprise threats – represents a core segment of threat modeling activity. For instance, technical analysts and strategists working for a corporate/security organization could team to design the outlines of such ventures inside the spaces native to flowcharts. Analysts may choose to survey a variety of events and identify the ones that pose present/future threats to the sponsor organization. The expanse of stages undertaken in the course of such initiative could describe a specific instance of threat modeling undertaken in specific contexts. These flowcharts could take shape through multiple outlines that remain specific to the nature of threats undergoing analysis.
Further to the above, analysts must work to identify the factors or aspects of agency – or sequence of possible events – that could originate potential threats to functioning systems, paradigms, or networks. Analysts must undertake threat modeling with a focus on tiers of risk that could manifest during the routine performance of systems or networks. Locations of sub-par performance, for instance, could gain the spotlight during such analysis; similarly, operating interfaces/relationships between system components and external elements could emerge as flashpoints that generate threats and risks. In light of these, flowcharts must take shape as tools that promote the design – and sustained operation – of threat modeling structures and mechanisms. Additionally, analysts could extend such initiative to fashion remediation measures that address emerging sets of threats and incipient risks alike.
Transmission of messages inside a system may gain special attention from analysts working to further projects and initiatives centered on threat modeling. Such transmission forms an essential segment of operational reality that underlies and animates modern systems, processes, and networks. Any interruptions (or misrouting or misdirection) in the acts and modes of such transmission could trigger errors that could snowball into localized/systemic threats. Therefore, designers of systems must architect flowchart-based designs that examine/analyze the routes, methods, and techniques of message transmission across networks and systems. Further, designers could invest effort to impart flexibility/automation to the dynamics of system operation, wherein networks can self-correct low-grade errors in message direction or transmission. This stance represents an advanced form of threat modeling that may emerge inside extended editions of flowcharts.
Impacts from risks/threats that could possibly incident the success of organizations – in terms of attaining business objectives – must undergo analysis/delineation within threat modeling flowcharts. Analysts must therefore, work to discern the components and operational aspects of risk as part of assessing potential threats. An evaluation of the internal environment of organizations must accompany such analysis; this stance allows analysts to calibrate the extent of impact in tune with the operational rigor/discipline engineered into processes that animate the relevant segments of internal environments. Additionally, analysts specializing in threat modeling may elect to benchmark sets of potential risks – as part of subsequent attempts to mold best practices, the implementation of which allows organizations to defeat an array of operational risks and curb emergent threats.
Strategies to design counter-measures could comprise a central facet of ongoing efforts invested in threat modeling exercises. Analysts working on this sub-project could consult with security specialists in a bid to sketch the outlines of counter-measures inside flowcharts. These measures could include reinforcing systemic defenses, etching alternatives to mainstream modes of operation, locating the points of sub-par performance inside networks/systems, among others. These could find detailed expression in different segments of flowchart – or multiple editions of these diagrams – thereby elevating and diversifying the scope/depth of threat modeling activities. Additionally, analysts/strategists could survey the subsequent outcomes as part of techniques that pre-empt the emergence of threats in future scenarios.
Ideas and concepts – such as regression analysis and threat intelligence co-relations – could inform and enrich analysts’ approach to enlightened forms of threat modeling activity. Analysts must survey/examine the nature/tenor/impact of threats that emerged in the past – as a step toward envisaging the nature/expanse of emerging/future risks and threats. In terms of assessing the various aspects of threat intelligence, analysts/strategists could work to create compendiums of intelligence, data, and information – typically sourced from variety of external repositories of appropriate technical/historical literature. These actions, when designed with agency of flowcharts, allow analysts and other stakeholders to gain clarity into the nature of the emerging landscapes of risks/threats. Further, the existence of completed flowcharts reinforces the ability of analysts to frame superior frameworks that enhance response to extant/emerging threats.
Constant and consistent tenets of policy – such as assessing vulnerable points in a system (or network) – and evolving a specific set of responses – when devised and implemented simultaneously may comprise the cornerstone of threat modeling initiatives. Such a wide-ranging stance could help organizations upgrade their institutional threat (assessment/response) mechanisms, postures, and stances. Consequently, analysts could utilize agency of flowcharts to devise the moving parts of such policy – and outline the methods and steps that implement these across organizations. In addition, illustrations enable modelers to refine postures and stances, communicate effectively with stakeholders, and build confidence in the sinews that drive organizations to cope with bad actors.
Interactions with these paragraphs encourage readers to consider the many contexts/arenas wherein flowcharts help designers to enrich and enlighten the progress registered by threat modeling initiatives. Creators and designers could ideate on different planes in their quest to discover newer techniques that can expand the scope/depth of such activity. The visual spaces inside flowcharts enable creators to also discover new insight into threat modeling processes, an event that may significantly impact outcomes for sponsor organizations. In addition, masterful renditions of illustration can elevate the quality of instruction transmitted to new generations of researchers/modelers. This development bears potential to break new ground in terms of threat assessment, as also the evolving techniques that allow analysts/strategists to cope with the unknown.
Further to the above, designers could utilize flowcharts to classify new versions/editions of threats that emerge from malevolent activity. Such acts reinforce the body of technical literature in this domain of contemporary human endeavor, reinforce awareness levels in the analyst community, encourage all stakeholders to gain awareness, and could potentially guide focused research endeavors into the headline topic. In addition, connected illustrations could uplift myriad aspects of threat modeling into a fine art balanced by the exacting rigors of modern analytical sciences.