2016
DOI: 10.1142/s0218539316400131
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vulnerability Patch Modeling

Abstract: The Information Technology products are suffering from various security issues due to the flaws residing in the software system. These flaws allow the violations of security policy and leads into vulnerability. Once the associated user discovers vulnerability the number of intrusions increases until the vendor releases a patch. The patching process helps in maintaining the stability of the software and reduces the probability of damage potential. Even after diffusion and installation whether the patch has succ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 2) used only the patch score (i.e., the score is calculated by weighting the selected criteria in the context of the organization for each vulnerability) to determine the patch order. We discovered our method in [5] needs improvement because historical data and practical experience are the inevitable factors to increase the success rate of patch [28]. We also learned from the practical experience shared in the patch management community of experts 3 , some patch failures could be avoided by prioritization (e.g., patching a microcode vulnerability in Ubuntu requires the kernel to be patched in advance; otherwise, the mitigation failed).…”
Section: Contributionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 2) used only the patch score (i.e., the score is calculated by weighting the selected criteria in the context of the organization for each vulnerability) to determine the patch order. We discovered our method in [5] needs improvement because historical data and practical experience are the inevitable factors to increase the success rate of patch [28]. We also learned from the practical experience shared in the patch management community of experts 3 , some patch failures could be avoided by prioritization (e.g., patching a microcode vulnerability in Ubuntu requires the kernel to be patched in advance; otherwise, the mitigation failed).…”
Section: Contributionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Deploy patch process is iterated for each item (vulnerability) in the file until the stop signal is generated. ACVRM will stop patch execution if the acceptance rate of a failure [28] (i.e., the percentage of the unsuccessful patch accepted by security experts in the organization) is exceeded. The default acceptance rate in our design is up to 10% failure of patches in patch_prioritization.json for each host.…”
Section: Design and Implementationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have proposed four models with different distributions as shown by Equations 11,12,15,and 16. It may be noted that…”
Section: Operational Coveragementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beattie et al explored a mathematical model that optimizes the time to patch. Recently, Kansal et al proposed a cost framework to evaluate the optimal discovery and patch release time, but they have not evaluated the utility of the framework.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%