An Investigation into Inconsistency of Software Vulnerability Severity across Data Sources
Roland Croft, M. Ali Babar, Li Li

TL;DR
This paper investigates the inconsistency of software vulnerability severity rankings across different data sources, revealing how such discrepancies impact prioritization and suggesting ways to improve data reliability.
Contribution
It characterizes severity ranking inconsistencies, identifies factors influencing misjudgment, and quantifies their impact on severity prediction performance.
Findings
Severity often underestimated during initial reporting
Six attributes correlated with severity misjudgment
Inconsistencies degrade severity prediction accuracy by up to 77%
Abstract
Software Vulnerability (SV) severity assessment is a vital task for informing SV remediation and triage. Ranking of SV severity scores is often used to advise prioritization of patching efforts. However, severity assessment is a difficult and subjective manual task that relies on expertise, knowledge, and standardized reporting schemes. Consequently, different data sources that perform independent analysis may provide conflicting severity rankings. Inconsistency across these data sources affects the reliability of severity assessment data, and can consequently impact SV prioritization and fixing. In this study, we investigate severity ranking inconsistencies over the SV reporting lifecycle. Our analysis helps characterize the nature of this problem, identify correlated factors, and determine the impacts of inconsistency on downstream tasks. Our findings observe that SV severity often…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research · Software Engineering Research · Information and Cyber Security
