Industry News Coverage

Below is a comprehensive monthly review of the news and other media’s coverage of CVE. A brief summary of each news item is listed with its title, author (if identified), date, and media source.

April 17, 2014, March 26, 2014

CVE is mentioned in a March 26, 2014 article entitled "Biased software vulnerability stats praising Microsoft were 101% misleading" on The main topic of the article is a review of the "Secunia Vulnerability Review 2014" report.

CVE is mentioned when the author references the talk about the impact of the uncertainty in vulnerability statistics entitled "Buying into the Bias: Why Vulnerability Statistics Suck" at Black Hat Briefings 2013 that was co-presented by CVE List Editor Steve Christey and Brian Martin of the Open Security Foundation in Las Vegas, NV, on July 31, 2013.

The author states: "If a vulnerability report is misleading, then I can only imagine the amount of aggravation it causes some people, such as the gentlemen who presented "Buying Into the Bias: Why Vulnerability Statistics Suck" at Black Hat 2013. At that time, Jericho, the content manager of the Open Source Vulnerability Database (OSVDB), and Steve Christie, the editor of the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) list, announced, "Most of these statistical analyses are faulty or just pure hogwash. They use the easily-available, but drastically misunderstood data to craft irrelevant questions based on wild assumptions, while never figuring out (or even asking us about) the limitations of the data. This leads to a wide variety of bias that typically goes unchallenged, that ultimately forms statistics that make headlines and, far worse, are used for budget and spending." During their presentation, they added, "As maintainers of two well-known vulnerability information repositories, we're sick of hearing about sloppy research after it's been released, and we're not going to take it any more." The author then discusses Brian Martin's (aka Jericho's) review of the Secunia report., March 21, 2014

CVE is mentioned in a March 21, 2014 article entitled "When software development produces a lemon, make lemonade" on CVE is mentioned when the author states: "the Secure Development Lifecycle (SDL) that grew out of the Microsoft initiative has helped to change the way developers think about software security. The SDL process now shows up as a requirement in government procurements, and the National Security Agency says it has made an impact on OS security. "A fundamental goal of the SDL process is to reduce the attack surface," NSA said in an evaluation of Windows 7 security for the Defense Department and the intelligence community. "Since adoption of the SDL process, the number of Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures on Microsoft products in the National Vulnerability Database has declined." "A preliminary System and Network Analysis Center analysis has determined that the new Windows 7 security features, coupled with the use of the SDL process throughout the development cycle, has assisted in the delivery of a more secure product," the assessment concluded. We still are a long way from being as secure as we want to be or can be. But there has been progress."

February 2014

Secunia Web Site, February 26, 2014

CVE-IDs are included in annual "Secunia Vulnerability Review 2014" report by Secunia that "Analyzes the evolution of software security from a global endpoint perspective. It presents data on vulnerabilities and the availability of patches, and correlates this information with the market share of programs to map the security threats to IT infrastructures." The report also explains what CVE is and how common identifiers improve security.

How CVE-IDs are used in the report is explained as follows: "CVE has become a de facto industry standard used to uniquely identify vulnerabilities which have achieved wide acceptance in the security industry. Using CVEs as vulnerability identifiers allows correlating information about vulnerabilities between different security products and services. CVE information is assigned in Secunia Advisories. The intention of CVE identifiers is, however, not to provide reliable vulnerability counts, but is instead a very useful, unique identifier for identifying one or more vulnerabilities and correlating them between different sources. The problem in using CVE identifiers for counting vulnerabilities is that CVE abstraction rules may merge vulnerabilities of the same type in the same product versions into a single CVE, resulting in one CVE sometimes covering multiple vulnerabilities. This may result in lower vulnerability counts than expected when basing statistics on the CVE identifiers."

The report is available for download at