Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/8610
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorEcik, Harun-
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-30T16:41:55Z-
dc.date.available2022-07-30T16:41:55Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationEcik, H. (2021, December). Comparison of Active Vulnerability Scanning vs. Passive Vulnerability Detection. In 2021 International Conference on Information Security and Cryptology (ISCTURKEY) (pp. 87-92). IEEE.en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9781665407762-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1109/ISCTURKEY53027.2021.9654331-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/8610-
dc.description14th International Conference on Information Security and Cryptology, ISCTURKEY 2021 -- 2 December 2021 through 3 December 2021 -- -- 175906en_US
dc.description.abstractVulnerability analysis is an integral part of an overall security program. Through identifying known security flaws and weaknesses, vulnerability identification tools help security practitioners to remediate the existing vulnerabilities on the networks. Thus, it is crucial that the results of such tools are complete, accurate, timely and they produce vulnerability results with minimum or no side-effects on the networks. To achieve these goals, Active Vulnerability Scanning (AVS) or Passive Vulnerability Detection (PVD) approaches can be used by network-based vulnerability scanners. In this work, we evaluate these two approaches with respect to efficiency and effectiveness. For the effectiveness analysis, we compare these two approaches empirically on a test environment and evaluate their outcomes. According to total amount of accuracy and precision, the PVD results are higher than AVS. As a result of our analysis, we conclude that PVD returns more complete and accurate results with considerably shorter scanning periods and with no side-effects on networks, compared to the AVS. © 2021 IEEE.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.en_US
dc.relation.ispartof14th International Conference on Information Security and Cryptology, ISCTURKEY 2021 - Proceedingsen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectactive vulnerability scanningen_US
dc.subjectpassive vulnerability detectionen_US
dc.subjectNetwork securityen_US
dc.subjectActive vulnerability scanningen_US
dc.subjectIdentification toolsen_US
dc.subjectIntegral parten_US
dc.subjectPassive vulnerability detectionen_US
dc.subjectSecurity flawsen_US
dc.subjectSecurity programsen_US
dc.subjectSecurity weaknessen_US
dc.subjectSide effecten_US
dc.subjectVulnerability analysisen_US
dc.subjectVulnerability detectionen_US
dc.subjectScanningen_US
dc.titleComparison of Active Vulnerability Scanning vs. Passive Vulnerability Detectionen_US
dc.typeConference Objecten_US
dc.departmentFakülteler, Mühendislik Fakültesi, Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Bölümüen_US
dc.departmentFaculties, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Computer Engineeringen_US
dc.identifier.startpage87en_US
dc.identifier.endpage92en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85124406887en_US
dc.institutionauthorEcik, Harun-
dc.identifier.doi10.1109/ISCTURKEY53027.2021.9654331-
dc.authorscopusid57447540100-
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKonferans Öğesi - Uluslararası - İdari Personel ve Öğrencien_US
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeConference Object-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
Appears in Collections:Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Bölümü / Department of Computer Engineering
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / Scopus Indexed Publications Collection
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

168
checked on Nov 11, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.