Cited by 13Information and Cyber SecurityTopic ModelingNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

TRACE: Relationship Analysis and Causal Factor Extraction in Cyber Threat Intelligence Reports

Vaitheeshwari, R., Wu, Eric Hsiao-Kuang, Lin, Ying-Dar, Hwang, Ren-Hung, Lin, Po-Ching, Lai, Yuan-Cheng, Ali, Asad·2025·IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing

Abstract

Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) reports provide valuable insights into cybersecurity attack techniques, which are essential for understanding threat execution. Identifying the root causes of these techniques is crucial for developing effective defense mechanisms. However, the unstructured nature and inconsistent terminology of CTI reports pose significant challenges in extracting causal factors, such as Common Weakness Enumerations (CWEs) and vulnerable data components, limiting proactive responses and the understanding of attack interdependencies. To address these challenges, we propose TRACE, a novel framework that extracts causal factors linked to adversarial techniques and generates comprehensive causal graphs revealing interdependencies within CTI reports. TRACE combines pattern extraction and tagging methods to address the limitations of existing approaches. Utilizing Sentence-based Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (SBERT) embeddings enhanced with knowledge mappings and deep learning techniques, TRACE discovers and models causal relationships between attack techniques within the reports. By bridging the gap between attack techniques and their underlying vulnerabilities, TRACE provides actionable insights to enhance cybersecurity defenses. Evaluated on 710 CTI reports, TRACE achieved an F1 score of 0.87, demonstrating its accuracy in extracting causal factors and its potential to advance automated causal analysis in cybersecurity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tdsc.2025.3532885

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Shackleford, 2015, Who’s using cyberthreat intelligence and how
  2. Ding, Applying BERT to long texts, 12792

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Vaitheeshwari, R., Wu, E. H.-K., Lin, Y.-D., Hwang, R.-H., Lin, P.-C., Lai, Y.-C., & Ali, A.
Affiliations
  • National Central University (TW)
  • National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (TW)
  • National Chung Cheng University (TW)
  • National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (TW)
  • National Institute of Cyber Security, Ministry of Digital Affairs, Taipei, Taiwan
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing
Published
2025-07
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
3544-3560
ISSN
  • 1545-5971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0018
  • 2160-9209
OpenAlex
W4406753679
Cited by
12
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5
FWCI
12.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Cybersecurity Center of Excellence
  • National Science and Technology Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
Keywords
causal graphs, attack techniques, Common Weakness Enumeration, vulnerability detection, SBERT embeddings, knowledge mapping, pattern extraction, unstructured text analysis, cyber defense

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review