CSPM EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 4 (2025) Security and Safety, 4 (2025) 2024019 References
Issue
Security and Safety
Volume 4, 2025
Security and Safety in Network Simulation and Evaluation
Article Number 2024019
Number of page(s) 19
Section Other Fields
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/sands/2024019
Published online 25 February 2025
  1. Jia Y, Qi Y and Shang H et al. A practical approach to constructing a knowledge graph for cybersecurity. Engineering 2018; 4: 53–60. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Jia Y, Gu Z and Du L et al. Artificial intelligence enabled cyber security defense for smart cities: A novel attack detection framework based on the MDATA model. Knowledge-Based Syst 2023; 276: 110781. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Alshamrani A, Myneni S and Chowdhary A et al. A Survey on advanced persistent threats: techniques, solutions, challenges, and research opportunities. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 2019; 21: 1851–77. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Navarro J, Deruyver A and Parrend P. A systematic survey on multi-step attack detection. Comput Secur 2018; 76: 214–49. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. ATT&CK: Adversarial Tactics, Techniques, and Common Knowledge, https://attack.mitre.org/ [Google Scholar]
  6. CAPEC: Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification, https://capec.mitre.org [Google Scholar]
  7. CVE: Common vulnerabilities and exposures, https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln [Google Scholar]
  8. CWE: Common Weakness Enumeration, https://cwe.mitre.org/ [Google Scholar]
  9. CPE: Common Platform Enumeration, https://nvd.nist.gov/products/cpe [Google Scholar]
  10. Angxiao Zhao, Gu Z and Jia Y et al. TSEE: a novel knowledge embedding framework for cyberspace security. WWWJ 2023; 26: 4131–4152. [Google Scholar]
  11. Han Z, Li X and Liu H et al. DeepWeak: Reasoning common software weaknesses via knowledge graph embedding. In: 2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER). Campobasso, IEEE, 2018, 456–66. [Google Scholar]
  12. Guo H, Chen S and Xing Z et al. Detecting and augmenting missing key aspects in vulnerability descriptions. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 2022; 31: 1–27. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Yuan L, Bai Y and Xing Z et al. Predicting entity relations across different security databases by using graph attention network. In: 2021 IEEE 45th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), Madrid, Spain, IEEE, 2021, 834–43. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ren Y, Xiao Y and Zhou Y et al. CSKG4APT: A cybersecurity knowledge graph for advanced persistent threat organization attribution. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2022; 35: 5695–5709. [Google Scholar]
  15. Wang Q, Mao Z and Wang B et al. Knowledge Graph Embedding: A Survey of Approaches and Applications. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2017; 29: 2724–43. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Xiao H, Xing Z and Li X et al. Embedding and predicting software security entity relationships: a knowledge graph based approach. In: Neural Information Processing: 26th International Conference (ICONIP 2019), Australia, Springer, 2019, pp.50–63. [Google Scholar]
  17. Papadakis G, Ioannou E and Thanos E et al. Entity Resolution: Past, Present, and Yet-to-Come. The Four Generations of Entity Resolution. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ji S, Pan S and Cambria E et al. A Survey on knowledge graphs: representation, acquisition and applications. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learning Syst 2022; 33: 494–514. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Long Y, Xiang X and Jing X et al. MDATA Model Based Cyber Security Knowledge Representation and Application. In: 2023 8th International Conference on Data Science in Cyberspace (DSC), China, IEEE, 2023, pp. 483–490. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zhang S, Ou X and Caragea, D. Predicting cyber risks through national vulnerability database. Inf Secur J Glob Perspect 2015, 24: 194–206. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Li X, Chen J, Lin Z and Zhang L et al. A mining approach to obtain the software vulnerability characteristics. In: 2017 fifth international conference on advanced cloud and big data (CBD), China, IEEE, 2017, 296–301. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bordes A, Usunier N and Garcia-Duran A et al. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. Adv. Neural Inf Proc Syst 2015, 26. [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang Z, Zhang J and Feng J et al. Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. The AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI), Canada, AAAI Press, 2014, pp. 1112–1119. [Google Scholar]
  24. Yang B, Yi T and He X et al. Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. ArXiv preprint [arXiv: 1412.6575], 2014 [Google Scholar]
  25. Trouillon T, Welbl J and Riedel S et al. Complex Embeddings for Simple Link Prediction. International conference on machine learning. USA: PMLR, 2016, pp. 2071–2080. [Google Scholar]
  26. Sun Z, Deng Z and Nie H et al. Rotate: Knowledge graph embedding by relational rotation in complex space. ArXiv preprint [arXiv: 1902.10197], 2019. [Google Scholar]
  27. Xiao H, Xing Z and Li X et al. Embedding and predicting software security entity relationships: A knowledge graph based approach. In: 6th International Conference (ICONIP), Australia, Springer, 2019, pp. 50–63. [Google Scholar]
  28. Lin Y, Liu Z and Luan H et al. Modeling relation paths for representation learning of knowledge bases. ArXiv preprint [arXiv: 1506.00379], 2019. [Google Scholar]
  29. ATT&CK Groups: Groups, https://attack.mitre.org/groups/ [Google Scholar]
  30. Ma C, Xiang X and Xie Y, et al. Uncovering Security Entity Relations with Cyber Threat Knowledge Graph Embedding. In: International Conference on Network Simulation and Evaluation (NSE), Singapore: Springer, 2023, pp. 20–35. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.