Editorial Ethics

General Principles

Cybersecurity: Education, Science, Technique is committed to integrity, transparency, accountability, editorial independence, and fairness throughout the publication process. The journal follows recognised principles of scholarly publishing and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, clarity, and relevance of a manuscript to the journal's scope. Decisions are not influenced by an author's nationality, citizenship, institutional affiliation, gender, race or ethnicity, religion, political views, disability, seniority, or commercial considerations.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must:

  • submit original work and acknowledge all sources and contributions accurately;
  • ensure that the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration elsewhere;
  • present methods, data, results, limitations, and conclusions honestly and accurately;
  • retain and, where ethically and legally possible, provide access to data and materials needed to verify the findings;
  • disclose funding, relevant conflicts of interest, use of AI, and any other information necessary to assess the work transparently;
  • obtain all required permissions, approvals, and informed consent;
  • respond to editorial and reviewer comments professionally and in good faith;
  • notify the Editorial Office promptly if a significant error is discovered before or after publication;
  • cooperate with legitimate enquiries into research or publication integrity.

Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate image or data manipulation, citation manipulation, undisclosed duplicate publication, paper-mill activity, manipulated peer review, and misrepresentation of authorship are unacceptable.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship is limited to individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the work, participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for the integrity of their contribution and the publication as a whole.

Providing funding, administrative support, technical assistance, data collection without intellectual contribution, or general supervision alone does not justify authorship. Such contributions should be acknowledged where appropriate and with the contributor's permission.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

  • all listed authors meet the authorship criteria;
  • no eligible author has been omitted;
  • the author order has been agreed by all authors;
  • all authors have reviewed and approved the submitted and final versions;
  • complete and accurate author metadata are entered in OJS.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must include a reasoned explanation and written agreement from all affected authors. The Editorial Office may request institutional confirmation and may reject a change that cannot be justified.

AI systems cannot qualify for authorship. Their use must comply with the journal's Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

  • evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, and within the agreed timeframe;
  • assess the work within their area of expertise and decline assignments they cannot review competently;
  • declare actual or potential conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment;
  • treat manuscripts, data, and reviewer correspondence as confidential;
  • avoid using unpublished information for personal or professional advantage;
  • support criticisms with clear scholarly reasoning and avoid personal remarks;
  • alert the editor to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data irregularities, ethical concerns, or relevant uncited work;
  • refrain from contacting authors directly about the manuscript.

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscript material to public generative-AI services or delegate their scholarly assessment to an AI system.

Responsibilities of Editors and the Editorial Board

Editors must:

  • protect editorial independence and make decisions on scholarly grounds;
  • apply the journal's policies consistently and without discrimination;
  • preserve the confidentiality and integrity of submitted material and reviewer identities;
  • select suitably qualified and independent reviewers;
  • manage conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when impartiality may reasonably be questioned;
  • provide authors with clear decisions and relevant reviewer comments;
  • investigate credible concerns and allegations fairly and proportionately;
  • correct the scholarly record when necessary;
  • ensure that submissions by editors or Editorial Board members receive independent handling and peer review without involvement by the author-editor;
  • prevent commercial, institutional, personal, or political interests from influencing editorial decisions.

The publisher supports the Editorial Board's independence, the technical security of OJS, long-term preservation, accurate metadata, and compliance with applicable law and recognised publication-ethics standards.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose relationships or circumstances that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, their judgement. The journal manages such disclosures in accordance with its Conflicts of Interest Policy.

Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, personal or sensitive data, educational interventions, or other activities requiring oversight must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements. Authors must state the name of the approving body, the approval or protocol identifier where applicable, and how informed consent was obtained or why it was waived.

Information that could identify individuals must not be published without appropriate consent or another valid ethical and legal basis.

Security-Sensitive Research

Cybersecurity research must be conducted lawfully and responsibly. Authors must confirm that testing, access, scanning, data collection, vulnerability analysis, and experiments involving information systems or networks were authorised where authorisation was required.

Authors should follow responsible-disclosure practices for previously unknown vulnerabilities and should avoid publishing operational details that create a disproportionate and immediate risk of harm. Where details are restricted for legitimate security reasons, the manuscript should explain the nature of the restriction sufficiently for editorial and peer-review assessment.

Data, Code, and Reproducibility

Authors should make supporting data, code, protocols, and other research materials available in a trusted repository where legal, ethical, contractual, confidentiality, and security considerations permit. Every article should include a Data Availability Statement explaining where supporting materials can be found or why access is restricted.

Editors or reviewers may request underlying data or documentation when necessary to evaluate the manuscript or investigate a concern. Failure to provide requested material without a valid reason may affect the editorial decision or lead to post-publication action.

Duplicate and Concurrent Submission

A manuscript must not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time. Substantially overlapping or previously published material must be disclosed and cited. A preprint posted in accordance with the journal's deposit policy is not considered prior publication, but its existence and location must be disclosed at submission.

Research Misconduct and Complaints

Credible concerns about research or publication integrity are assessed confidentially and without presuming misconduct. The Editorial Office may request explanations and evidence, consult independent experts, and contact relevant institutions, funders, or other journals when necessary and proportionate.

The journal distinguishes honest error from misconduct and selects corrective action according to the evidence and the seriousness of the matter. Possible actions include requesting a correction, rejecting a manuscript, closing a submission, notifying an institution, publishing an Expression of Concern, or retracting an article.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision or submit a complaint by providing a clear explanation and supporting evidence through OJS or the journal's official email address. Appeals concerning scholarly judgement are considered by an editor who was not materially involved in the disputed decision wherever practicable. The outcome is communicated in writing.

Post-Publication Responsibilities

The journal considers credible post-publication comments and evidence and will correct the scholarly record when necessary. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, retractions, and removals are handled under the journal's Corrections and Retractions Policy.