Comparisons of Bitcoin Cryptosystem with Other Common Internet Transaction Systems by AHP Technique

This paper describes proposed methodology for evaluation of critical systems and prioritization of critical risks and assets identified in highly secured information systems. For different types of information assets or security environments it is necessary to apply different techniques and methods for their prioritization and evaluation. In this article, VECTOR matrix method for prioritization of critical assets and critical risks is explained and integrated into AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) technique as a set of fixed criteria for evaluation of defined alternatives. Bitcoin cryptocurrency was compared and evaluated along with other common Internet transaction systems by information security professionals according to defined VECTOR criteria. Also, the newly proposed hybrid AHP model is presented with potential case studies for future research. This article tries to discover security posture of Bitcoin cryptocurrency in the context of information security risks related to the existing most common online payment systems like e-banking, m-banking, and e-commerce.

[1]  Samantha Thomas Cruz,et al.  Information Security Risk Assessment , 2007, Information Security Management Handbook, 6th ed..

[2]  Imran Ghani,et al.  Adapting OCTAVE for Risk Analysis in Legacy System Migration , 2014, KSII Trans. Internet Inf. Syst..

[3]  María Teresa Lamata,et al.  Consistency in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: a New Approach , 2006, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

[4]  George R. S. Weir,et al.  From ZeuS to Zitmo: Trends in Banking Malware , 2015, 2015 IEEE Trustcom/BigDataSE/ISPA.

[5]  Roman Yampolskiy,et al.  Bitcoin Message: Data Insertion on a Proof-of-Work Cryptocurrency System , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW).

[6]  E Ferguson,et al.  From comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management: recent developments and applications. , 2006, Environment international.

[7]  Adam Hayes,et al.  What Factors Give Cryptocurrencies Their Value: An Empirical Analysis , 2015 .

[8]  Slaven Smojver.  Selection of Information Security Risk Management Method Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) , 2011 .

[9]  James Stevens,et al.  Introducing OCTAVE Allegro: Improving the Information Security Risk Assessment Process , 2007 .

[10]  Zeyar Aung,et al.  Investigating factors behind choosing a cryptocurrency , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.

[11]  Evangelos Triantaphyllou,et al.  USING THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS FOR DECISION MAKING IN ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS: SOME CHALLENGES , 1995 .

[12]  Dong Mei Zhao,et al.  The Research of Information Security Risk Assessment Method Based on AHP , 2011 .

[14]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .

[15]  Jun-Jie Lv,et al.  A Ranking Method for Information Security Risk Management Based on AHP and PROMETHEE , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Management and Service Science.

[16]  S. L. Gilbert,et al.  NIST Special Publication 260-133 2001 Edition , 2001 .

[17]  Reuben Grinberg.  Bitcoin: An Innovative Alternative Digital Currency , 2011 .

[18]  Paolo Tasca.  Digital Currencies: Principles, Trends, Opportunities, and Risks , 2015 .

[19]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis and environmental risk assessment for nanomaterials , 2007 .

[20]  Mahsa Agha Mohyeddin,et al.  FAHP-TOPSIS risks ranking models in ISMS , 2014, 7'th International Symposium on Telecommunications (IST'2014).

[21]  Ming Chang Lee.  Information Security Risk Analysis Methods and Research Trends: AHP and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method , 2014 .