Assessment Specification:
Coursework Report
(100% of the module mark)
Assessment Information
Module Title: OPERATING SYSTEM SECURITY Module Code: COCS71152
Module Tutors: Chris HAWKINS
Submission Deadline (via Turnitin ONLY): 10th January 2025 – 17:00hrs
Instructions to candidates
This assignment is one of two parts of the formal assessment for COCS71152 and is, therefore
compulsory. The assignment is weighted at 100% of the course grade. You will be required to work
individually, so time management is very important.
When reading this assignment please read all elements fully and understand what is being asked of
you, DO NOT rely on your friend to explain what is expected, if you have any issues, please ask the
teaching team.
Your task
Your task in this assignment is to showcase your abilities in both technical skills and critical
reflection.
You are asked to produce a technical-based report which completes the following tasks in relation
to a fresh install of the Linux Operating System that you will be provided with (all actions must be
completed on the system that is provided to you in the module):
1. Explain and demonstrate the use of PAM to create and enforce a minimum password
policy of 8 characters, upper case and lower case characters, and a symbol.
2. Explain and demonstrate the creation of an IPTable ruleset to mitigate a DDoS attack
coming from an internal network address ([Link] for these purposes).
3. Explain and demonstrate the hardening of the kernel so that the machine ignores all ICMP
packets.
4. Critically evaluate one of the above methods in relation to the securing of the OS.
The submitted project should be approximately 3,000 words long. There is a buffer of +/- 10%
either side of this. The word count starts from the first word of the introduction and ends at the
last word of your conclusion. It includes everything within the main body text such as words in
titles, text boxes, and captions, but does not include words in analytical tables or graphs, the
reference list, appendices, tables of contents, abstract and footnotes and acknowledgments.
Please note: whilst analytical tables are not included in the word count, these should be used in a
focussed, relevant, and concise manner. All figures and tables should be properly labelled and
referred in the text.
The word count therefore does NOT include Abstract, Contents page, Acknowledgements, etc.
A suggested layout for this report is as follows (suggestion only – format this however you see fit):
- Introduction – 250 words
- Step 1 – 500 words
- Step 2 – 500 words
- Step 3 – 500 words
- Critical Evaluation of the above Steps – 1000 words
- Conclusions – 250 words
Your paper must be written in your own words and must include a reference section indicating all
your sources of information. Remember your sources of information should be authoritative (not
Wikipedia, for example). You should also consider the use of illustrations to exemplify your
discussion. You must be very careful not to plagiarise material. Plagiarism can result in a mark of
0 for the assignment, or even failure of the entire module.
Remember to include academic paper requirements:
- Title Page with module code, module title and title of the work as well as your name and
student number
- Table of Contents + List of Tables + List of Figures
- Make sure that you use figure titles, figure numbers, section numbers, subsection numbers
- Referencing is KEY – you must reference and cite where required, if in doubt – ask your
module tutor and consult the guidance documents that are available on Blackboard.
Plagiarism and Academic Dishonesty
Please do NOT copy any other student’s work (or lend other students your work) or copy directly
sentences and paragraphs from the Internet unless attributing the section correctly to the author
in quotation marks, e.g.
“The work of Handscomb forms a clear comparison to that of Johnson” Campion (2006).
In general, try only to quote short sentences and not full paragraphs. Instead you should as much as
possible try to use your own words. As a guide you should try to limit your usage of direct
quotes to around 5 or 7 occurrences within the report. Remember also to put in the full reference in
an appropriate style at the end of the report.
Please also note that the content written in the report must be original in relation to your other
modules, i.e. you must not copy and reuse content directly from your other modules as this will
breach the university’s rules on academic dishonesty. If you are unsure of these rules please
access the following web site: [Link]
Submission Guidelines
Your final research paper should be word processed and submitted by the deadline.
Hence, you need to submit your research paper at least 15 mins before the deadline.
Your documentation should be submitted in electronic format to the Turnitin plagiarism-checking
service via the link on the university VLE, Blackboard. This will be set up near to the deadline to allow
you to submit your work. You must submit a DOCX or PDF version of the research paper
otherwise it might NOT be recognised by the Turnitin system. If you have any questions/queries, please
contact your tutor.
Advice
Read the relevant literature, which is extensive, in this area. It is an absolute pre-condition for
being able to understand and justify any conclusions or recommendations that you make. It is
important that you start your preparation early.
Proofread your work before hand-in; check for any grammatical or spelling errors.
If you have any questions or need further clarification on this assignment, please email the tutor.
Marking Criteria
Mark
Criterion
(weighting) 0 - 49 (Fail) 50-59 (Pass) 60 – 69 (Merit) 70 – 100 (Distinction)
Introduction An excellent introduction section
A good, well-defined, which is clear and well defined.
(10%) Some evidence of a defined
Introduction section is introduction section is
introduction section, which Introduces the report to the reader
not clearly defined, apparent which informs the
shows an attempt at well, ensuring that they are informed
with no definitive start reader of the contents of the
introducing the reader to the as to the report.
to the report. report, although this is limited
content of the report. Excellent use of structure to increase
in detail.
understanding of the report.
Steps 1 - 3 There are good
The steps are not There is an attempt at demonstrations of the steps There is an exemplary demonstration
(30%) practically practically demonstrating the of all steps provided, in which all steps
provided, which are evidenced
demonstrated, or the steps that are required by well with appropriate are achieved correctly. The evidence
practical the specification. The screenshots. The of the steps is exceptionally well
demonstration of these demonstrations are correct, demonstrations are correct presented with correctly and nearly
steps is limited and/or although with some issues. and would function in a real formatted screenshots showing the
not complete / correct. The explanation of the steps world setting. relevant areas.
The explanation of the is largely correct and No issues are evident. There is an outstanding explanation of
steps is limited or contains an acceptable level the steps which showcases a total
absent, and/or is of detail showcasing the There is a good explanation of understanding of not only the step
incorrect in what is understanding of the author. the steps, although with some itself, but also the concepts behind the
stated. minor faults. The step and how it impacts the system.
There is evidence of understanding of the author is
Little to no evidence of academically valid research evident. There is exemplary research
research and what is being conducted which conducted which is wholly
present is not provides the work with There is good evidence of academically valid and shows
academically valid. academic credibility. academically valid research exceptional evidence of rigour.
being conducted.
Mark
Criterion
(weighting) 0 - 49 (Fail) 50-59 (Pass) 60 – 69 (Merit) 70 – 100 (Distinction)
Critical Evaluation Limited actual critical A good critical evaluation is
(40%) evaluation is present, present within the work,
although there is a clear which complies with the
An exemplary evaluation of the step is
attempt at this which shows assignment specification.
presented which totally complies with
adherence to academic Clear evidence of thinking the assignment specification.
Little to no critical requirements and thinking at about the problem at
Exceptional evidence of thinking at, or
evaluation of the step Postgraduate level. Postgraduate level.
beyond, Postgraduate level.
that has been selected Some comparisons and Good comparisons and
Comparisons and evaluation of the
is present. critiques levelled against the thoughts on the step that has
step that has been selected is
What is present is step, with practical been selected, the arguments
insightful and novel – and totally
limited and vague, not applications somewhat made address both the wider
considers multiple angles of the step
aligning to the marking considered but not the focus scope of the issue, as well the
and it’s application / effect.
specification or the of the work. The arguments ‘pros and cons’.
Exemplary consideration of both the
requirements of the that are levelled are one- There is a good consideration
dimensional in thinking and theoretical and practical applications
assignment. of the practical application of
do not always consider the and issues of the step that has been
No evidence of thinking wider scope of the matter at the step, as well as the issues
selected.
at Postgraduate level. that are present with the step.
hand. Research is exemplary in it’s
A good level of research is
Limited independent thought conducting, showing outstanding
present which shows good
and contributions to the adherence to academic standards.
evidence of academic rigour.
work which relies mostly Independent thought and
upon existing research. Good level of independent
considerations are present throughout
thought has been put into the
Research that has been all aspects of the work.
work, which goes beyond
conducted is basic, and not relying on the existing
always academically valid. research
Mark
Criterion
(weighting) 0 - 49 (Fail) 50-59 (Pass) 60 – 69 (Merit) 70 – 100 (Distinction)
Overall Report Report is presented in a clear and
Style professional structure, showing clear
(10%) No clear and coherent Report is presented in a evidence of thought behind the
No clear and coherent
structure present in the structured way, with a good structure of the report as well as the
structure present in the
report. attempt at logical progression content that is given.
report.
Report presentation is from section to section. Presentation is professional in
Report presentation is
unclear and lacks any Presentation is clear and execution and allows for easy reading
unclear and lacks any form of
form of consistency. makes the report easy to read. and understanding. No formatting
consistency.
Multiple and/or severe Presentation is consistent errors shown with consistent layout
Multiple and/or severe
presentation errors from section to section with shown throughout the report.
presentation errors which
which limit the reader’s some formatting errors which Formatting is absolutely clear, with
limit the reader’s ability to
ability to understand are only minor in nature and apparent thought given to how to
understand what is being
what is being written. do not affect understanding. improve the understanding and ease-
written.
Formatting makes the Formatting is clear and the of-access on the part of the reader.
Formatting makes the report
report difficult to read report is easy for the reader to Evidence of clear, logical and thorough
difficult to read and follow.
and follow. follow. additional research, going above and
beyond the base-level material given
in the sessions themselves.
Mark
Criterion
(weighting) 0 - 49 (Fail) 50-59 (Pass) 60 – 69 (Merit) 70 – 100 (Distinction)
References and Some, limited, attempt at
Citations referencing shown in the Good attempt at referencing
No real attempt at
(10%) report, although with clear apparent in the report with Excellent referencing apparent in the
referencing evidence in
errors shown in style and very few errors which are report which go beyond the standard
the report.
execution. limited in scope. and show at least an attempt at
Either limited or no
Limited citations shown in Good citations shown in the picking academically robust sources –
evidence of citations
the body of the text, with the body of the text, with the evidence of academic rigour at a
within the body of the
formatting of the citations formatting correct with very sufficient level for an MSc candidate.
report.
largely correct although with limited or no errors. No errors apparent in either citations
References are some errors.
References are in the correct or reference lists – which are entirely
provided in the wrong
References in the correct style with no, or limited, in the correct style.
style.
style with some errors errors.
shown.
