JerryGamblin.com

Hacker Summer Camp, as it is colloquially known, is three security conferences that are all next week in Las Vegas. The three conferences that makeup Security Summer Camp are:

• BSides Las Vegas
• Blackhat USA
• DEF CON

While preparing for these conferences, I dug through their schedules and picked out the talks I was most interested in catching.

BSides Las Vegas

BSides Las Vegas is back with a fantastic schedule and is always one of the best community events of the year. I am giving a talk on Wednesday at BSides titled Vulnerability Intelligence for All: Say Goodbye to Data Gatekeeping, which I am super excited about.

Here are a few other fantastic talks I will try to catch:

• Cyber risk: How does cyber events become so costly?
• Enemy at the Gate, and Beyond: Detecting and Stopping Account Takeover
• For Intel and Profit: Exploring the Russian Hacktivist Community
• Honey, is that you? Building test-driven, identity-centric honeypots together.
• Machine Learning for Insider Threats: At the Intersection of Security and Privacy
• Security Data Science Teams: A Guide to Prestige Classes
• The Dark Playground of CI/CD: Attack Delivery by GitHub Actions
• Towards Effective & Scalable Vulnerability Management

BlackhatUSA

Blackhat USA is the “commercial conference” of the three but has a lot of good talks this year. The talks I am looking forward to this year are:

• What Does an LLM-Powered Threat Intelligence Program Look Like?
• Compromising LLMs: The Advent of AI Malware
• Entrepreneur Journeys: What it Takes to Start a Startup

DEF CON

DEF CON is probably the world’s most well-known hacker conference, and this year’s schedule looks impressive.  Here is what I am going to attempt to see this year:

Growing the Community of AI Hackers with the Generative Red Team
Badge of Shame: Breaking into Secure Facilities with OSDP
ndays are also 0days: Can hackers launch 0day RCE attack on popular software only with chromium ndays?
Vacuum robot security and privacy – prevent your robot from sucking your data

Along with these talks, they have these interest-specific villages where I will spend a lot of time. Here are the villages where I know I will be spending time.

• Car Hacking Village
• Blue Team Village
• App Sec Village
• Crypto & Privacy Village

Wrapping Up

While the talks above are the ones that I am looking forward to, my friends have built HackerTracker, which has a complete list of all the talks for the weekend and is worth checking out.

I am also really hoping someone hacks the new Sphere next week.

With the first half of 2023 over, I figured I would take some time and review the data and highlight some of the most interesting data points so far this year. This GitHub repo contains the code for all the data and graphs this blog uses.

By The Numbers

So far this year, there have been 14,129 published CVEs. On average, there were 78.06 CVEs published per day. So far, March is the month with the most CVEs published, with 2,519 or 17.8% of all CVEs for the year. 

January 26th had the most CVEs published in a single day, with 348 or 2.46% of all CVEs.

CVEs By Month

Month	CVEs	Percentage
January	2338	16.5
February	2123	15.0
March	2519	17.8
April	2335	16.5
May	2420	17.1
June	2394	16.9

CVSS

The Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) provides a way to capture the principal characteristics of a vulnerability and produce a numerical score from 0.0 to 10.0, reflecting its severity. The average CVSS score this year was 7.13.

So far this year, 18 CVEs scored a “perfect” 10.0.

CVE-2023-21928, a vulnerability in Oracle Solaris, had the lowest score of 1.8.

CPE

Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) is a structured naming scheme for information technology systems, software, and packages to help identify vulnerable software identified in a CVE.

So far this year, there have been 1,610 unique CPEs identified in CVEs. The most common was cpe:2.3:o:google:android:12.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:* that was applied to 309 CVEs

CVE-2023-20027, a vulnerability in Cisco IOS XE, is the CVE with the most CPEs with 190 unique, vulnerable configurations.

CNA

CVE Numbering Authorities (CNAs) are software vendors, open source projects, coordination centers, bug bounty service providers, hosted services, and research groups authorized by the CVE Program to assign CVE IDs to vulnerabilities and publish CVE Records within their specific scopes of coverage.

Today there are 303 CNAs. So far this year, 198 unique assigners have published a minimum of 1 CVE. To make this confusing, 147 CNAs have not posted a CVE this year, and 124 CNAs not listed as an assigner published at least one CVE.

Top CNAs

The Top 5 CNAs so far this year:

VulDB
Github
PatchStack
WPScan
Microsoft

Four of the top five CNAs this year, excluding Microsoft, were purpose-built to report CVEs for various projects.

CWE

CWE is a community-developed list of software and hardware weakness types. It is a common language, a measuring stick for security tools, and a baseline for weakness identification, mitigation, and prevention efforts.

There are 1332 CWEs, and so far this year, 221 have been assigned to CVEs. CWE-79 was the most assigned CWE and was assigned 2415 times or to 17.09% of all CVEs. NVD didn’t assign a CWE 1819 times or to 12.87% of all CVEs.

Notes

• All data and graphs for this blog post were created using the jupyter notebooks in the GitHub Repo.
• Rejected CVEs have been removed from the dataset because some CNAs publish and reject any unused reserved CVE IDs causing an artificially inflated record count.
• CVE.ICU is a jupyterbook site that I run that has real-time CVE information throughout the year.

Reference Rot (also called linked rot) is when hyperlinks, over time, cease to point to their originally targeted file, web page, or server due to that resource being relocated to a new address or permanently unavailable.

Tod Beardsley from the CVE board gave a talk at the 2023 CVE Global Summit called ‘Link Rot: The Problem and Archiving for Posterity‘ on the problem of reference rot, sadly I was not able to attend, but I was interested in how bad the problem was, so this past week I wrote some code to find out.

Reference Counts

First, I collected the CVE data from the NVD data feeds and parsed all the references.

Here are the high-level numbers:
CVEs: 199,019
Reference Links: 797,474
Average References Per CVE: 4

CVE-2014-0224, an OpenSSL vulnerability, has the most reference links with 303(!?) unique references.

Finding Reference Rot

I knew I could not hand-check the nearly 800,000, so the logical first step was to see how many of the 13,991 unique domains responded to DNS requests using PyNnlookup and Google’s Public DNS [8.8.8.8].

It took over thirty minutes to run the 13,991 DNS lookups, and when done 1,520 of the listed hosts did not respond.

How Bad Is Reference Rot?

Those 1,520 domains account for 109,411 broken links, or 13.71% of all links.

Over 35,000 broken links are in CVE years 2005, 2006, and 2007.

One domain, SecurityFocus.com, is responsible for 82,854 or over 75% of all broken links. The top 5 domains account for over 90% of all broken links.

What Can Be Done?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You may be able to point the dead links to the Wayback Machine at archive.org or a similar site, but this will need to be figured out before we lose tons of valuable vulnerability research.

Data

All Reference Domains
All Broken Domains
Broken Domains By CVE Year
All Broken Links With CVE Information
Jupyter Code

Notes

Looking at DNS records is probably the simplest form of checking links and is not 100% foolproof. To get a 100% complete picture of the broken links, you would need to pull the web pages and do some form of data verification that was beyond this project’s scope.

Here is a picture to make my unfurl link look better:

2022 was a record-breaking growth year for CVE data, and I figured it would be a great way to start the new year by going through the data and highlighting some of the most interesting data points. All the data and graphs used in this blog are available in this GitHub repo.

CVEs By The Numbers

We ended 2022 with 25,093 published CVEs. On average, there were 68.75 CVEs published per day. December was the month with the most CVEs published, with 2,426 or 9.7% of all CVEs for the year. 5,414 CVEs, or 21.6% of all CVEs, were published on Tuesdays. June 2nd had the most CVEs published in a single day, with 320.

CVEs By Month

CVEs By Day Of Week

Day	CVEs	Percentage of CVEs
Monday	4384	17.5
Tuesday	5414	21.6
Wednesday	4353	17.3
Thursday	4742	18.9
Friday	5231	20.8
Saturday	473	1.9
Sunday	496	2

Top 10 2022 Publishing Days

CVE Growth

Like every year since 2017, we saw a record-breaking number of CVEs published, with 25,093, a 24.51% increase over 2021. It also means that 13.06% of all CVEs published were published in the previous year.

CVE Identifiers

A somewhat confusing part of CVE IDs can be the year identifier. It is often assumed that the year represents when a CVE is published, but it represents when it was assigned or when the vulnerability was made public.

I say all that to point out that the “oldest” CVEs published this year belong to BlackICE PC Protection, 20 years after they were made public:

CVE-2003-5001
CVE-2003-5002
CVE-2003-5003

CVSS

The Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) provides a way to capture the principal characteristics of a vulnerability and produce a numerical score from 0.0 to 10.0, reflecting its severity. The average CVSS score this year was 7.19.

This year 48 CVEs scored a “perfect” 10.0.

CVE-2022-27049, a vulnerability in RaidDrive, had the lowest score of 2.0.

CPE

Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) is a structured naming scheme for information technology systems, software, and packages to help identify vulnerable software identified in a CVE.

This year there were 2,815 unique CPEs identified in CVEs. The most common was cpe:2.3:o:google:android:11.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:* that was applied to 299 CVEs

CVE-2022-22160, a vulnerability in Juniper Networks Junos OS, is the CVE with the most CPEs with 364 unique, vulnerable configurations.

CNA

CVE Numbering Authorities (CNAs) are software vendors, open source projects, coordination centers, bug bounty service providers, hosted services, and research groups authorized by the CVE Program to assign CVE IDs to vulnerabilities and publish CVE Records within their specific scopes of coverage.

Today there are 261 CNAs. In 2022, 200 unique assigners published a minimum of 1 CVE. To make this confusing, 109 CNAs did not publish a CVE this year, and 83 CNAs not listed as an assigner published at least one CVE.

Top CNAs

The Top 5 CNAs last year were:

Github
WPScan
Microsoft
VulDB
Huntr.dev

Four of the top five CNAs this year, excluding Microsoft, were purpose-built to report CVEs for various projects.

CWE

CWE is a community-developed list of software and hardware weakness types. It is a common language, a measuring stick for security tools, and a baseline for weakness identification, mitigation, and prevention efforts.

There are 1332 CWEs, and this year, 236 were assigned to CVEs. CWE-79 was the most assigned CWE and was assigned 3230 times or to 12.88% of all CVEs. NVD didn’t assign a CWE 2835 times or to 11.30% of all CVEs.

Notes

• All data and graphs for this blog post were created using the jupyter notebooks in the GitHub Repo.
• Rejected CVEs have been removed from the dataset because some CNAs publish and reject any unused reserved CVE IDs causing an artificially inflated record count.
• CVE.ICU is a jupyterbook site that I run that has real-time CVE information throughout the year.

The National Vulnerability Database plays a vital role in the CVE publication process that many people may overlook or not know they are responsible for. After MITRE publishes a CVE, the NVD enriches it with data points that make it actionable by security companies and professionals.

Some of these data points include:
CWE
CVSS 3.1 Base Score
CPE

I was recently asked how long, on average, it takes NVD to complete its initial analysis. I looked around for a bit and couldn’t find the information, so I built this jupyter notebook to find out using the NVD Change History API and the very helpful {Initial Analysis} filter the API provides.

After running the notebook for all CVEs published between January 1st, 2022, and November 15th, 2022, the average analysis time takes 5 days 22:14:22 (the Standard Deviation is 3 days 15:42:25). I will leave it to the math geeks to decide which number is more valuable, but either number is excellent considering the growth of CVEs.

The quickest analyzed CVE this year is CVE-2022-43488 at 27 minutes, and the slowest is CVE-2021-35036 at over 213 days.

Since everyone loves a good visualization, here is a quick graph (and code) of the analysis timing.

Note: The notebook is not the fastest, and with the API rate limiting, it took just over 7 hours to run the 22,619 requests. If you are interested in looking at the data, it is all here in a CSV.