Source author record

Curtis Arnold

Curtis Arnold appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
1topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Towards Approaches to Continuous Assessment of Cyber Risk in Security of Computer Networks

We review the current status and research challenges in the area of cyber security often called continuous monitoring and risk scoring (CMRS). We focus on two most salient aspects of CMRS. First, continuous collection of data through automated feeds; hence the term continuous monitoring. Typical data collected for continuous monitoring purposes include network traffic information as well as host information from host-based agents. Second, analysis of the collected data in order to assess the risks - the risk scoring. This assessment may include flagging especially egregious vulnerabilities and exposures, or computing metrics that provide an overall characterization of the network's risk level. Currently used risk metrics are often simple sums or counts of vulnerabilities and missing patches. The research challenges pertaining to CMRS fall mainly into two categories. The first centers on the problem of integrating and fusing highly heterogeneous information. The second group of challenges is the lack of rigorous approaches to computing risk. Existing risk scoring algorithms remain limited to ad hoc heuristics such as simple sums of vulnerability scores or counts of things like missing patches or open ports, etc. Weaknesses and potentially misleading nature of such metrics are well recognized. For example, the individual vulnerability scores are dangerously reliant on subjective, human, qualitative input, potentially inaccurate and expensive to obtain. Further, the total number of vulnerabilities may matters far less than how vulnerabilities are distributed over hosts, or over time. Similarly, neither topology of the network nor the roles and dynamics of inter-host interactions are considered by simple sums of vulnerabilities or missing patches.