MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ERS0: Enhancing Military Cybersecurity with AI-Driven SBOM for Firmware Vulnerability Detection and Asset Management

2024· article· en· W4402834613 on OpenAlexaff
Max Beninger, Philippe Charland, Steven H. H. Ding, Benjamin C. M. Fung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaMcGill UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirmwareComputer securityVulnerability (computing)Asset (computer security)Computer scienceVulnerability assessmentMicrocodeAsset managementBusinessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Firmware vulnerability detection and asset management through a software bill of material (SBOM) approach is integral to defensive military operations. SBOMs provide a comprehensive list of software components, enabling military organizations to identify vulnerabilities within critical systems, including those controlling various functions in military platforms, as well as in operational technologies and Internet of Things devices. This proactive approach is essential for supply chain security, ensuring that software components are sourced from trusted suppliers and have not been tampered with during production, distribution, or through updates. It is a key element of defense strategies, allowing for rapid assessment, response, and mitigation of vulnerabilities, ultimately safeguarding military capabilities and information from cyber threats. In this paper, we propose ERS0, an SBOM system, driven by artificial intelligence (AI), for detecting firmware vulnerabilities and managing firmware assets. We harness the power of pre-trained large-scale language models to effectively address a wide array of string patterns, extending our coverage to thousands of third-party library patterns. Furthermore, we employ AI-powered code clone search models, enabling a more granular and precise search for vulnerabilities at the binary level, reducing our dependence on string analysis only. Additionally, our AI models extract high-level behavioral functionalities in firmware, such as communication and encryption, allowing us to quantitatively define the behavioral scope of firmware. In preliminary comparative assessments against open-source alternatives, our solution has demonstrated better SBOM coverage, accuracy in vulnerability identification, and a wider array of features.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207