Volume 12 - Issue 2
Use of Expert Judgments to Inform Bayesian Models of Insider Threat Risk
- Frank L. Greitzer
PsyberAnalytix, LLC, Richland, WA USA
Frank@PsyberAnalytix.com
- Justin Purl
Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VA USA
Justin.purl@gmail.com
- Paul J. Sticha
Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VA USA
Paul.Sticha@psychinference.com
- Martin C. Yu
Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VA USA
myu@humrro.org
- James Lee
George Mason University, Fairfax, VA USA
jlee194@gmu.edu
Keywords: Insider threat, SOFIT ontology, expert judgments, Bayesian models, threat assessment models
Abstract
To promote effective detection and mitigation of insider threats, research has sought to identify, validate,
and integrate cyber and behavioral (sociotechnical) indicators into comprehensive models of
insider threat risk. Because validation of proposed indicators is hampered by a lack of appropriate
real-world data, innovative approaches have used expert judgments as an initial step in developing
and evaluating threat assessment models. For probabilistic models such as Bayesian networks, assigning
probability values to posterior evidence is particularly challenging because it often relies
on subjective base-rate (prior) and conditional probabilities estimates that are difficult to obtain and
fraught with human errors and biases. The purpose of the present study was to test the efficacy of
an expert knowledge elicitation method that does not rely on probability judgments in supporting development
of probabilistic as well as non-probabilistic/risk-based predictive models of insider threat.
We compared previously obtained expert judgments of threat/risk levels for a large set of indicators
within a comprehensive ontology of technical and behavioral indicators of insider threats with
corresponding likelihood ratio estimates that we obtained in the present study, concluding that the
observed high correlation between the risk versus probability judgments demonstrates the efficacy
of acquiring expert judgments of threat/risk levels as a practical alternative to the difficult and unreliable
methods of acquiring conditional probability estimates from human experts. Based on these
results, we created a Bayesian model of insider threat that incorporates all (200) individual factors
specified in the ontology and compared the performance of the Bayesian and risk-based models
in predicting the judgments of experts, as proxies for real data and ground truth. Results indicated
that the Bayesian model performed slightly better than a risk-based model that had been proposed
and examined in prior research. This research demonstrated benefits of cross-fertilization of methods
used in developing non-probabilistic/risk-based and probabilistic models in the insider threat domain.
Implications of these findings for advancing insider threat predictive analytics, and future research
needs, are discussed.