Assignment 3: evaluating access control methods

Points: 100

Assignment 3: Evaluating Advance Restrain Methods

Criteria

 

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

 

Fair

70-79% C

 

Proficient

80-89% B

 

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Explain in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

Weight: 15%

Did not comply or inaccuratelyexplained in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

Insufficiently explained in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

Partially explained in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

Satisfactorily explained in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

Thoroughly explained in your own language the elements of the subjoined rules of advance restrain: a) Mandatory advance restrain (MAC); b) Discretionary advance restrain (DAC); c) Role-based advance restrain (RBAC).

2. Compare and dissimilarity the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.
Weight: 15%

Did not comply or inaccurately compared and did not comply or inaccurately dissimilarityed the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Insufficiently compared and hardly dissimilarityed the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Partially compared and hardly dissimilarityed the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Satisfactorily compared and satisfactorily dissimilarityed the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Thoroughly compared and wholly dissimilarityed the unequivocal and privative aspects of employing a MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

3. Suggest rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Weight: 15%

Did not comply or inaccuratelysuggested rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Insufficiently suggested rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Partially suggested rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Satisfactorily suggested rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

Thoroughly suggested rules to calm the privative aspects for MAC, DAC, and RBAC.

4. Evaluate the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and advise the best rule for the structure. Provide a rationale for your acceptance.

Weight: 25%

Did not comply or inaccuratelyevaluated the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and did not comply or inaccuratelyrecommended the best rule for the structure. Did not comply or inaccuratelygranted a rationale for your acceptance.

Insufficiently evaluated the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and hardly adviseed the best rule for the structure. Hardly granted a rationale for your acceptance.

Partially evaluated the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and hardly adviseed the best rule for the structure. Hardly granted a rationale for your acceptance.

Satisfactorily evaluated the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and satisfactorily adviseed the best rule for the structure. Satisfactorily granted a rationale for your acceptance.

Thoroughly evaluated the use of MAC, DAC, and RBAC rules in the structure and wholly adviseed the best rule for the structure. Wholly granted a rationale for your acceptance.

5. Speculate on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose. Suggest a temporization to oration such dare(s).

Weight: 15%

Did not comply or inaccuratelyspeculated on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose. Did not comply or inaccuratelysuggested a temporization to oration such dare(s).

Insufficiently speculated on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose.  Hardly suggested a temporization to oration such dare(s).

Partially speculated on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose. Hardly suggested a temporization to oration such dare(s).

Satisfactorily speculated on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose.  Satisfactorily suggested a temporization to oration such dare(s).

Thoroughly speculated on the usual dare(s) when the structure applies the rule you chose.  Wholly suggested a temporization to oration such dare(s).

6. 3 references 

Weight: 5%

No references granted

Does not encounter the required reckon of references; all references inconsiderable character choices.

Does not encounter the required reckon of references; some references inconsiderable character choices.

Meets reckon of required references; all references noble character choices.

Exceeds reckon of required references; all references noble character choices.

7. Clarity, answerableness mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present 

7-8 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present

Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency