In a recent study titled “Shedding Light on CVSS Scoring Inconsistencies: A User-Centric Study on Evaluating Widespread Security Vulnerabilities,” researchers delve into the inconsistencies found within the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS). CVSS is a widely used method for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in vulnerability management. However, the study reveals that when multiple analysts evaluate the same vulnerability, their scores often differ. This raises questions about the consistency of CVSS evaluations and the factors that influence them. The research, conducted through an online survey with 196 CVSS users, demonstrates that specific CVSS metrics are inconsistently evaluated for widespread vulnerability types, including the top three vulnerabilities from the “2022 CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses” list. In a follow-up survey with 59 participants, it was found that 68% of users gave different severity ratings for the same vulnerabilities. Despite these inconsistencies, most evaluators still perceive CVSS as a useful tool for vulnerability assessment. The study concludes by discussing potential reasons for the inconsistent evaluations and providing recommendations for improving scoring consistency.
The research offers a summary of its findings, which can be found on their website. The study highlights the awareness among evaluators of the problematic aspects of CVSS, yet they still view it as a valuable resource for vulnerability assessment. The goal of CVSS is to provide comparable scores across different evaluators, but the research reveals that achieving this goal remains a challenge. The inconsistent evaluations of specific CVSS metrics indicate a need for further exploration and refinement of the system.
The study focuses on the Top 3 vulnerabilities from the “2022 CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses” list, shedding light on the inconsistencies in their evaluation. These vulnerabilities play a significant role in the overall security landscape and are therefore crucial to be accurately assessed. The findings of this research emphasize the importance of addressing the inconsistencies in CVSS evaluations to ensure better vulnerability management practices.
In conclusion, the study highlights the inconsistencies within the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) and their impact on vulnerability assessment. The research demonstrates that specific CVSS metrics are inconsistently evaluated for widespread vulnerability types, including the top three vulnerabilities from a prominent list. Despite these inconsistencies, most evaluators still consider CVSS a valuable tool. The study recommends addressing these inconsistencies and improving the consistency of scoring in CVSS evaluations to enhance vulnerability management practices.
Key points:
1. The study reveals inconsistencies in the evaluation of vulnerabilities within the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
2. Multiple analysts often provide different scores for the same vulnerability, raising questions about the consistency of CVSS evaluations.
3. Specific CVSS metrics are inconsistently evaluated for widespread vulnerability types, including prominent vulnerabilities.
4. Despite the inconsistencies, most evaluators still perceive CVSS as a useful tool for vulnerability assessment.
5. The study recommends addressing these inconsistencies and improving the consistency of scoring in CVSS evaluations to enhance vulnerability management practices.
