• 1. Key Aspects of Publication Ethics for workshop materials
• 2. Peer review process

Key Aspects of Publication Ethics for workshop materials:

The Workshop is committed to maintaining the highest level of integrity and novelty in the content proposed.
This journal has a competing interest policy in place.
All presenting materials require authors to comply with international, national and/or institutional standards of research reporting. This is particularly important for studies involving security and/or social data, and Informed Consent.
Subscribe to COPE's principles (https://publicationethics.org/) for addressing misconduct. This means the material is committed to investigating any allegations of misconduct, to maintain the integrity of research.
We come after follow principles:

• Clear and Public Statements: All research issues must have accessible publication ethics and malpractice statements.
• Adherence to Codes of Conduct: Investigators should follow recognized codes of conduct and ethical practices.
• Prevention of Malpractice: We emphasizes the responsibility of all parties involved (authors, editors, publishers, reviewers) to prevent malpractice.
• Addressing Ethical Issues: Statements should address issues like plagiarism, data falsification, conflicts of interest, and authorship disputes.
• Transparency and Openness: All procedure should be transparent about their editorial processes and policies.
• Author Responsibilities: Authors must ensure their work is original, cite accurately, and disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
• Programme committee Responsibilities: We should evaluate submissions based on merit, ensure fair peer review, and address any ethical concerns.
• Plagiarism: Ensuring that submitted work is original and properly cites sources.
• Data Fabrication or Falsification: Preventing the manipulation of data or the creation of false information.
• Conflicts of Interest: Ensuring that authors and editors disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
• Authorship Disputes: Defining clear authorship criteria and resolving any disputes about authorship.
• Editorial Misconduct: Ensuring that editors maintain objectivity and fairness in their decisions.
• Peer Review Manipulation: Preventing any attempts to influence or manipulate the peer review process.

Peer review process

All research materials will undergo peer review procedure.
Each article will be reviewed by at least two independent expert reviewers (anonymously).
All submissions are first reviewed for completeness and only then sent to be assessed editor assigned by Programme committee who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Editor has to be responsible for scientific section and cannot be on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript.
Editors will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision, but are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. A concern raised by a single peer reviewer or the Editor themself may result in the paper being rejected. Authors receive peer review reports with the editorial decision on their manuscript.
Proceedings papers are reviewed by the Programme Chairs and Programme Committee members of the respective section, with help from external reviewers selected by them.

The manuscript should not be submitted to more than one publication for simultaneous consideration. The submitted work should be original and should not have been published elsewhere in any form or language (partially or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work. (Please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the concerns about text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’), etc.