REVIEW 1 cited by
A Comparison of Vulnerability Feature Extraction Methods from Textual Attack Patterns
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
Nowadays, threat reports from cybersecurity vendors incorporate detailed descriptions of attacks within unstructured text. Knowing vulnerabilities that are related to these reports helps cybersecurity researchers and practitioners understand and adjust to evolving attacks and develop mitigation plans. This paper aims to aid cybersecurity researchers and practitioners in choosing attack extraction methods to enhance the monitoring and sharing of threat intelligence. In this work, we examine five feature extraction methods (TF-IDF, LSI, BERT, MiniLM, RoBERTa) and find that Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) outperforms the other four methods with a precision of 75\% and an F1 score of 64\%. The findings offer valuable insights to the cybersecurity community, and our research can aid cybersecurity researchers in evaluating and comparing the effectiveness of upcoming extraction methods.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
A Decade of Healthcare Cyber Threats: Empirical Analysis, Evidence-Based Prioritisation, and AI Threat Model
Using MITRE ATT&CK, CISA KEV, and NVD data, the paper reports a shift toward stealthy tactics in healthcare attacks and identifies 42 high-priority detection techniques.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.