2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.cose.2015.03.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Time series modeling of vulnerabilities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
39
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
39
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although both modeling approaches can be either descriptive or predictive (Höök et al, 2011), the distinction rather underlines the difference between statistical (empirical) and mathematical (mechanical) models; between stochastic and deterministic models -in essence, between statistical time series models and differential equations. The empirical approach follows the latter course, but not without statistical assessments over the plausibility of the mechanical models in a context that is not mechanical (for the other course see Roumani et al, 2015). The approach is subsequently elaborated with an introduction of the empirical data, a brief discussion of two growth functions, and an outline of computational details.…”
Section: Empirical Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although both modeling approaches can be either descriptive or predictive (Höök et al, 2011), the distinction rather underlines the difference between statistical (empirical) and mathematical (mechanical) models; between stochastic and deterministic models -in essence, between statistical time series models and differential equations. The empirical approach follows the latter course, but not without statistical assessments over the plausibility of the mechanical models in a context that is not mechanical (for the other course see Roumani et al, 2015). The approach is subsequently elaborated with an introduction of the empirical data, a brief discussion of two growth functions, and an outline of computational details.…”
Section: Empirical Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While measures from the last group, which assess whether the future direction goes up or down, have been sometimes used in the curve fitting context (López et al, 2004), the magnitude measures have been more common (Suominen and Seppänen, 2014;Young, 1993). The usual suspects in this group are the mean square error, the mean absolute deviation, and the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), which all have their own limitations (Hendry and Clements, 2000;Roumani et al, 2015). As the last one is arguably the most intuitive, it was adopted for the tentative forecast evaluation.…”
Section: Forecastsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the NVD is considered a standard for consulting vulnerability data, many research works use only the NVD as their vulnerability database (e.g., [42,47,50,55]). This is a natural choice since the NVD includes multiple resources for further understanding of the issue at hand.…”
Section: Vulnerability Database Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The research community has shown many different uses for OSINT, from its collection and processing [25,28,35,40,43,48,54,59], vulnerability life cycle analysis [27,30,42,50,56], to evaluating vulnerability exploitability [23,30,31,37,45]. There are two predominant OSINT sources in the literature: NVD (e.g., [23, 30, 31, 37, 42, 45, 47, 49-51, 55, 56]), and Twitter (e.g., [25, 32, 35, 37, 39-41, 43, 44, 48, 51, 53, 55, 58, 59]).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, some software vulnerability disclosure process models were developed using traditional time series models like Auto Regressive Moving Average (ARIMA) [21]. However, vulnerability disclosure data contain a lot of nonlinearity and thus traditional time series models might not be appropriate [22].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%