skip to main content
10.1145/2665936.2665941acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Enterprise Risk Assessment Based on Compliance Reports and Vulnerability Scoring Systems

Published:03 November 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

The risk of cyberattacks have become increasingly daunting as most of our socioeconomic activities have gone cyber-based. Comprehensive automated risk management is becoming necessity in today's dynamic networks. In this paper, we present an objective metric to assess the risk of cyberattacks on organizations' networks based on the security compliance reports. Our model considers various risk factors, including vulnerabilities distribution, dependency between them, and network configuration. We take advantage of Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) languages and measurement and scoring systems to study vulnerabilities and compute the system exposure. We also describe an evaluation plan to validate the presented metric.

References

  1. NIST Special Publication 800-30, Guide for Conducting Risk Assessments. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsSPs.html#800--30, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. G. Elahi, E. Yu, and N. Zannone. Security risk management by qualitative vulnerability analysis. In Security Measurements and Metrics (Metrisec), pages 1--10, Sept 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. H. Houmb, V. N. Franqueira, and E. A. Engum. Quantifying security risk level from CVSS estimates of frequency and impact. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(9):1622--1634, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. H. Joh and Y. K. Malaiya. Defining and assessing quantitative security risk measures using vulnerability lifecycle and cvss metrics. In The 2011 international conference on security and management (sam), 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. NIST. The security content automation protocol (SCAP). http://scap.nist.gov/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. X. Ou and A. Singhal. Security risk analysis of enterprise networks using attack graphs. In Quantitative Security Risk Assessment of Enterprise Networks, pages 13--23. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. N. Poolsappasit, R. Dewri, and I. Ray. Dynamic security risk management using bayesian attack graphs. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 9(1):61--74, Jan 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. K. Scarfone and P. Mell. The common configuration scoring system (CCSS): Metrics for software security configuration vulnerabilities. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistir/ir7502/nistir-7502_CCSS.pdf, December 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. D. Waltermire, C. Schmidt, K. Scarfone, and N. Ziring. Specification for the extensible configuration checklist description format (XCCDF) v1.2. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistir/ir7275-rev4/NISTIR-7275r4.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. X. Yin, Y. Fang, and Y. Liu. Real-time risk assessment of network security based on attack graphs. In 2013 International Conference on Information Science and Computer Applications (ISCA 2013). Atlantis Press, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Enterprise Risk Assessment Based on Compliance Reports and Vulnerability Scoring Systems

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              SafeConfig '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Cyber Security Analytics, Intelligence and Automation
              November 2014
              48 pages
              ISBN:9781450331470
              DOI:10.1145/2665936

              Copyright © 2014 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 3 November 2014

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              SafeConfig '14 Paper Acceptance Rate3of11submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate22of61submissions,36%

              Upcoming Conference

              CCS '24
              ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
              October 14 - 18, 2024
              Salt Lake City , UT , USA

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader