Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
125 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

DAG-Based Attack and Defense Modeling: Don't Miss the Forest for the Attack Trees (1303.7397v1)

Published 29 Mar 2013 in cs.CR

Abstract: This paper presents the current state of the art on attack and defense modeling approaches that are based on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). DAGs allow for a hierarchical decomposition of complex scenarios into simple, easily understandable and quantifiable actions. Methods based on threat trees and Bayesian networks are two well-known approaches to security modeling. However there exist more than 30 DAG-based methodologies, each having different features and goals. The objective of this survey is to present a complete overview of graphical attack and defense modeling techniques based on DAGs. This consists of summarizing the existing methodologies, comparing their features and proposing a taxonomy of the described formalisms. This article also supports the selection of an adequate modeling technique depending on user requirements.

Citations (331)

Summary

  • The paper presents a detailed taxonomy categorizing over 30 DAG-based techniques, unifying threat trees and Bayesian network approaches.
  • The methodology models hierarchical attack scenarios and countermeasures, enhancing systematic risk assessment for diverse security domains.
  • It emphasizes future research in automating model creation and fostering collaboration to bridge theoretical analysis with practical security applications.

An Overview of DAG-Based Attack and Defense Modeling Techniques

This paper presents a comprehensive survey of methodologies for attack and defense modeling that utilize directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). These approaches offer significant advantages in representing hierarchical structures of threats and defenses, providing a more systematic way to capture and understand complex security scenarios. The paper addresses the proliferation of over 30 distinct DAG-based methodologies, each with unique features and applications, and offers a taxonomy to help choose suitable methods based on specific requirements.

Graphical security models, particularly those structured around DAGs, have become invaluable for risk management and threat assessment across various domains, including SCADA systems, vehicular communications, and secure software engineering. This paper situates itself within this context, focusing on methodologies derived from threat trees and Bayesian networks, which offer structured ways of analyzing attack scenarios and developing robust defenses.

The survey details two primary approaches: those extending threat trees and those based on Bayesian networks. Threat trees begin with fear-inducing events, modeled at the root, and further refined into sub-events. This structured decomposition is advantageous for highlighting potential attack strategies and countermeasures. Bayesian networks, renowned for handling probabilistic inference, complement these tree structures by incorporating uncertainty and causal dependencies within security scenarios.

One of the survey’s key contributions is the taxonomy it proposes for DAG-based formalisms, organized by 13 aspects such as attack/defense orientation, static/sequential modeling, quantification capabilities, and the availability of supporting tools. This classification provides a framework for comparing formalisms, assisting researchers in selecting the most relevant method for their application.

The survey reveals two significant trends: unification and specification. Unification approaches, like attack–defense trees and Bayesian attack graphs, seek to create generalizable methods applicable to diverse security contexts, emphasizing formal underpinnings and a wide spectrum of metrics. Conversely, specification approaches target particular security issues, often developed from empirical studies. These include formalisms like intrusion DAGs and security goal models, which address domain-specific challenges but may lack broad applicability.

Through its meticulous categorization and evaluation of numerous methodologies, the paper highlights the dynamic intersection between theoretical research and applied security practices. The DAG-based methodologies are portrayed as crucial in advancing security risk assessment towards a more structured analysis framework, capable of integrating digital, physical, and social aspects of security threats.

Looking forward, the paper underscores the need for closer collaboration between researchers and practitioners to improve the practical applicability of these models. It also calls for further exploration into automated and semi-automated model creation using attack patterns, which could bridge the gap between extensive theoretical foundations and industrial application.

In summary, this paper not only serves as a detailed guide to existing DAG-based methodologies for attack and defense modeling but also lays out a roadmap for future research and development in this increasingly critical area of security analysis. The comprehensive overview of the techniques, their formal structures, and practical applications makes a significant contribution to both academic research and practical security management.