The CVE Comedy: Why One-Third of Security Vulnerabilities are a Joke!
Aram Hovespyan critiques the CVE assignment system, claiming a third of CVEs are meaningless and the CVSS scores inconsistent. He argues researchers rush CVEs for fame while CNAs avoid exposing their own flaws. Is this a case of quantity over quality or just a vulnerability popularity contest gone awry?
Hot Take:
Aram Hovespyan is calling for a makeover of the security vulnerability scene, suggesting that CVEs are about as reliable as a chocolate teapot. Is it time to shake up the cyber stage and give CVEs a reality check? Apparently, one-third of them are as meaningful as a cat meme during a corporate presentation. So, are we scoring vulnerabilities or playing a game of cybersecurity bingo?
Key Points:
– Aram Hovespyan critiques the CVE system, claiming one-third of its entries are questionable.
– CVE process involves multiple authorities, each with different motivations and, sometimes, misaligned incentives.
– The CVSS scores are often inconsistent and misused for quantitative analysis.
– Notable examples highlight CVE system’s flaws, including inflated vulnerability scores.
– Hovespyan suggests a shift towards threat modeling and contextual triage over reliance on CVEs and CVSS scores.