REVIEW 1 cited by
Automated Mapping of CVE Vulnerability Records to MITRE CWE Weaknesses
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In recent years, a proliferation of cyber-security threats and diversity has been on the rise culminating in an increase in their reporting and analysis. To counter that, many non-profit organizations have emerged in this domain, such as MITRE and OSWAP, which have been actively tracking vulnerabilities, and publishing defense recommendations in standardized formats. As producing data in such formats manually is very time-consuming, there have been some proposals to automate the process. Unfortunately, a major obstacle to adopting supervised machine learning for this problem has been the lack of publicly available specialized datasets. Here, we aim to bridge this gap. In particular, we focus on mapping CVE records into MITRE CWE Weaknesses, and we release to the research community a manually annotated dataset of 4,012 records for this task. With a human-in-the-loop framework in mind, we approach the problem as a ranking task and aim to incorporate reinforced learning to make use of the human feedback in future work. Our experimental results using fine-tuned deep learning models, namely Sentence-BERT and rankT5, show sizable performance gains over BM25, BERT, and RoBERTa, which demonstrates the need for an architecture capable of good semantic understanding for this task.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Labeling NIDS Rules with MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: Machine Learning vs. Large Language Models
On a dataset of 973 Snort rules, traditional ML models (SVM, F1 up to 0.87) outperformed ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini (best F1 0.62) at labeling rules with MITRE ATT&CK techniques.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.