{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024544179523141654, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.995798319327731, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The security (culture) rhombus. Redefining security environment

Goal The goal of this article is to present the author’s definition of security environment. It constitutes a redefinition and expansion of the narrow (four-element) approach presented in the White Book on National Security of the Republic of Poland. I propose a broad, eight-element approach.
Methods I redefine security environment based on several premises. The first is the concept of the triangle of (the need for) security – the existence of this triangle necessitates and is sufficient for the need for security to arise. The second premise is the existence of the rhombus of security (culture), which necessitates and is sufficient for security to manifest, i.e. for the need for security to be satisfied.
Results The above premises lead to the conclusion that the narrow approach to security environment should be ontically expanded to include elements comprising the triangle of the (need for) security and the security (culture) rhombus. This results in an eight-element definition of security environment.
Conclusions The article illustrates an important issue in the security sciences – the need to expand the definition of security environment. I present and justify an alternative to the narrow approach to security environment, which is based on the narrow definition presented in the White Book on National Security of the Republic of Poland.

