A method and apparatus for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation.

Abstract

This application discloses a method and apparatus for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation. The method includes: establishing a network security performance evaluation indicator system; determining the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP); obtaining the evaluation target in the evaluation indicator system; determining the weight of the second indicator based on the frequency of the evaluation target in preset sample data; determining the importance of the indicators in the evaluation indicator system; calculating and determining the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators; constructing a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the weights of the first, second, and third indicators; allocating indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm, which can comprehensively consider the importance and frequency of change of the indicators, providing more accurate evaluation results; and adjusting the weights of each indicator using a dynamic weight allocation mechanism, so that the weight allocation has a certain timeliness.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of network security technology, specifically to a method and apparatus for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of network technology, network security effectiveness assessment has become increasingly important. Traditional network security effectiveness assessments often rely on simple evaluations or weighted averages.

[0003] Therefore, there is a need for more accurate cybersecurity performance evaluation methods that reflect actual effectiveness. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of the above problems, this application provides a method and apparatus for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation, which can more accurately reflect the actual performance of network security and provide a basis for network security management.

[0005] In a first aspect, embodiments of this application provide a method for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation, including:

[0006] Establish an evaluation index system for cybersecurity effectiveness;

[0007] The weights of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system are determined based on the analytic hierarchy process.

[0008] The evaluation targets in the evaluation index system are obtained, and the index frequency analysis is performed based on the frequency of the evaluation targets in the preset sample data to determine the weight of the second index.

[0009] Determine the importance of each indicator in the evaluation indicator system, and analyze and calculate the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators.

[0010] A dynamic weight allocation algorithm is constructed based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight to allocate indicator weights.

[0011] In some embodiments, determining the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process includes:

[0012] The evaluation indicator system is decomposed into a hierarchical indicator system according to the subordinate relationship between the indicators.

[0013] The judgment matrix is ​​determined by comparing expert assessments using a predetermined ratio scale.

[0014] Calculate the weight value of each indicator in the judgment matrix of each layer relative to the previous layer;

[0015] The weight values ​​are sorted hierarchically, and the weight of the first indicator relative to the overall target is calculated.

[0016] In some embodiments, determining the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system and calculating the weight of a third indicator based on the importance of the indicators includes:

[0017] The evaluation indicators in the evaluation indicator system are dimensionless to obtain the evaluation indicator values. The evaluation indicators include: benefit-type evaluation indicators and cost-type evaluation indicators.

[0018] The evaluation index values ​​are ranked according to their importance, and scores are assigned to the ranked evaluation index values ​​according to their importance. The weight of the third index is then calculated.

[0019] In some embodiments, the step of constructing a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight, and allocating indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm, includes:

[0020] The average weight of the target evaluation index is obtained by summing and averaging the weights of the first, second, and third indicators.

[0021] Calculate the sum of the average values ​​of all weights in the evaluation target based on the weights of the first indicator, the second indicator, and the third indicator;

[0022] The comprehensive weight of the target evaluation index is assigned based on the ratio of the weight mean to the sum of the weights.

[0023] In some embodiments, determining the weights of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process further includes:

[0024] The judgment matrix is ​​subjected to a consistency check, which includes: calculating the largest eigenvalue, calculating the consistency index, and calculating the consistency ratio;

[0025] After the judgment matrix passes the consistency test, the weights of the corresponding index factors for each index are calculated based on the weight allocation arithmetic mean method or geometric mean method.

[0026] In some embodiments, determining the weight of the second indicator by performing frequency analysis based on the frequency of the evaluation target appearing in preset sample data includes:

[0027] Calculate the frequency of all indicators based on the frequency of each evaluation target in the preset sample data;

[0028] The frequency of the index is normalized to determine the weight of the second index.

[0029] In some embodiments, the evaluation index system includes: primary indicators, secondary indicators, and tertiary indicators;

[0030] The primary indicators include network security performance evaluation indicators, which are used to demonstrate the overall network security assessment within the evaluation indicator system.

[0031] The secondary indicators include technical system capability indicators, proactive defense and emergency response capability indicators, basic support capability indicators, and operational standardization capability indicators. Each secondary indicator also includes a preset number of tertiary indicators.

[0032] Secondly, embodiments of this application provide a device for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation, comprising:

[0033] The modeling module is used to establish an evaluation index system for network security effectiveness;

[0034] The first determining module is used to determine the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process.

[0035] The second determining module is used to obtain the evaluation targets in the evaluation index system and perform index frequency analysis based on the frequency of the evaluation targets in the preset sample data to determine the weight of the second index.

[0036] The third determining module is used to determine the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system, and to analyze and calculate the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators.

[0037] The allocation module is used to construct a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight, so as to allocate indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm.

[0038] Thirdly, embodiments of this application provide an electronic device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores program code that can run on the processor, and when the program code is executed by the processor, it implements a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security effectiveness assessment as described in any embodiment of the first aspect.

[0039] Fourthly, embodiments of this application provide a computer storage medium storing one or more programs, which can be executed by an electronic device as described in the third aspect to implement a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation as described in any embodiment of the first aspect.

[0040] This application provides a method, apparatus, electronic device, and storage medium for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation. By establishing a network security performance evaluation indicator system, the weights of each first indicator at each level of the evaluation indicator system are determined based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Evaluation targets in the evaluation indicator system are obtained, and frequency analysis is performed based on the frequency of the evaluation targets appearing in preset sample data to determine the weights of second indicators. The importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system is determined, and the weights of third indicators are calculated based on the importance of the indicators. A dynamic weight allocation algorithm is constructed based on the first, second, and third indicator weights. This algorithm allocates indicator weights, comprehensively considering the importance and frequency of change of indicators, providing more accurate evaluation results. The dynamic weight allocation mechanism adjusts the weights of each indicator, making the weight allocation more timely.

[0041] It should be understood that the description in this section is not intended to identify key or essential features of the embodiments of this application, nor is it intended to limit the scope of this application. Other features of this application will become readily apparent from the following description. Attached Figure Description

[0042] The present application will be described in more detail below based on embodiments and with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0043] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to an embodiment of this application is shown.

[0044] Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating an exemplary method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to an embodiment of this application is shown.

[0045] Figure 3 A schematic diagram illustrating an exemplary index weight allocation process proposed in one embodiment of this application is shown.

[0046] Figure 4 This paper shows a structural block diagram of an exemplary evaluation index system proposed in one embodiment of the present application;

[0047] Figure 5 This paper shows a flowchart illustrating the construction process of an exemplary dynamic weight allocation algorithm proposed in one embodiment of this application.

[0048] Figure 6 This paper shows a structural block diagram of a device for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to an embodiment of this application.

[0049] Figure 7A structural block diagram of an electronic device for performing a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to an embodiment of this application is shown.

[0050] Figure 8 This application illustrates a computer-readable storage medium for storing or carrying a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0051] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the embodiments and accompanying drawings. The illustrative embodiments and descriptions of this invention are only for explaining this invention and are not intended to limit this invention.

[0052] Traditional cybersecurity performance assessments often rely on simple evaluations or weighted averages, which are not effective in assessing cybersecurity performance.

[0053] By analyzing and combining the aforementioned technical problems, the inventors fully considered the importance and frequency changes of different indicators. In order to more accurately reflect actual performance, they combined hierarchical and frequency analysis to propose a method, device, electronic device, and storage medium for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation. This method can perform frequency analysis on network security performance evaluation indicators to determine their importance in network security. Based on the frequency analysis results of network security performance evaluation indicators, a dynamic weight allocation mechanism is adopted to adjust the weights of each indicator, making the weight allocation timely. This invention aims to solve the limitations and challenges existing in the prior art through this innovative method. The method for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation will be described in detail in subsequent embodiments.

[0054] The following describes an application scenario of a method for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation, as provided in an embodiment of this application:

[0055] Please see Figure 1 , Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation, as provided in this embodiment. In this embodiment, such a method can be applied to, for example... Figure 6 The device 300 shown in the network security performance evaluation allocates the weights of the indicators. Figure 7The illustrated electronic device 200 may include one or more devices. Multiple electronic devices can transmit information wirelessly and / or via wired means. These multiple electronic devices can collaboratively complete a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security effectiveness assessment. For example, electronic devices may include computers, mobile terminals, tablets, etc., and this application does not limit them. The following addresses... Figure 1 The process shown is described in detail. This method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation may include S110 to S150.

[0056] S110: Establish an evaluation index system for cybersecurity effectiveness.

[0057] In this application embodiment, constructing a network security performance evaluation index system is a systematic process. By organizing indicators of different dimensions and levels in an orderly manner, the network security performance evaluation results can be comprehensively and accurately reflected.

[0058] It should be noted that the construction process mainly includes clarifying objectives, formulating criteria and plans, and focusing on the quality and accuracy of data to ensure the reliability and effectiveness of the indicator system.

[0059] In some implementations, the evaluation indicator system includes: primary indicators, secondary indicators, and tertiary indicators;

[0060] The primary indicators include cybersecurity effectiveness assessment indicators, which are used to demonstrate the overall cybersecurity performance in the assessment indicator system.

[0061] The secondary indicators include technical system capability indicators, proactive defense and emergency response capability indicators, basic support capability indicators, and operational standardization capability indicators. Each secondary indicator also includes a predetermined number of tertiary indicators.

[0062] This application is not only applicable to organizations that have already deployed a certain number of security systems to evaluate the protection effectiveness and service capabilities of these systems in a real-world environment; it can also be applied to the development, maintenance, and upgrade of various information systems, especially before new systems go live and after major changes, to ensure that the security of the system meets the expected standards.

[0063] In this embodiment, please refer to Figure 4 , Figure 4 This is a structural block diagram of an exemplary evaluation index system provided in an embodiment of this application. The evaluation index system can be divided into three levels.

[0064] The secondary indicators are designed with reference to evaluation criteria such as GB / T 18336-2001, GB / T 30270-2024, and GB / T 33563-2024, combined with the characteristics of network security.

[0065] Secondary indicators can include technical system capabilities, proactive defense and emergency response capabilities, basic support capabilities, and operational compliance capabilities. Among them, technical system capabilities mainly assess the degree of damage to national and personal information security after cybersecurity breaches, including intrusion detection, security incidents, threat response, threat handling, false positives and false negatives, vulnerability patching, internal access, network traffic, and security auditing; proactive defense and emergency response capabilities mainly assess the acquisition and analysis of cybersecurity threat intelligence, including threat intelligence, emergency response, intrusion detection and protection; basic support capabilities mainly assess the synchronization between cybersecurity and information system construction, including cybersecurity, human, financial, and material resources; and operational compliance capabilities mainly assess the cybersecurity management situation, including security management and security monitoring and auditing.

[0066] The tertiary indicators are designed within the framework of the secondary indicators, with each secondary indicator having multiple tertiary indicators.

[0067] The evaluation index system constructed in this embodiment can formulate network security effectiveness evaluation indicators from four aspects: technical system capabilities, proactive defense and emergency response capabilities, basic support capabilities, and operational standardization capabilities. This method, by establishing a multi-level index system, covers multiple aspects and ensures that the evaluation results can truly reflect the network security status.

[0068] S120: Determine the weight of each primary indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process.

[0069] In some embodiments, S120 further includes S121 to S124, wherein:

[0070] S121: Decompose the indicators of the evaluation indicator system into a hierarchical structured indicator system according to their subordinate relationships.

[0071] S122: Determine the judgment matrix by comparing the results according to a predetermined ratio scale based on expert evaluation.

[0072] S123: Calculate the weight value of each indicator in the judgment matrix of each layer relative to the previous layer.

[0073] S124: Sort all weight values ​​hierarchically and calculate the weight of the first indicator relative to the overall target for all indicators.

[0074] In this embodiment, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) decomposes the network security performance evaluation indicators into a hierarchical structured indicator system according to their hierarchical relationships. Experts compare each indicator pairwise according to a certain ratio scale to form a judgment matrix. Then, mathematical methods are used to calculate the weight value of each indicator in each judgment matrix relative to the previous layer. Finally, the hierarchy is sorted and the weight coefficients of all indicators relative to the overall goal are calculated.

[0075] In this embodiment of the application, based on expert experience, each pair of elements is compared to determine their relative importance, and the 1-9 scale method is used to quantify the fuzzy problem, wherein:

[0076] 1: Equally important; 3: Slightly important; 5: Significantly important; 7: Strongly important; 9: Absolutely important; 2, 4, 6, 8: Intermediate values ​​between the above.

[0077] Suppose we have two indicator factors A i and A j The qualitative and quantitative results are shown in Table 1.

[0078]

[0079] Table 1

[0080] Construct a judgment matrix based on Table 1.

[0081]

[0082] In the formula: a ij a represents the relative importance of indicator i compared to indicator j. ij >0, a ij *a ji =1.

[0083] In some implementations, S120 further includes S125 to S126.

[0084] S125: Perform a consistency check on the judgment matrix, which includes: calculating the largest eigenvalue, calculating the consistency index, and calculating the consistency ratio.

[0085] In this embodiment, a consistency check is required to ensure the rationality of the judgment matrix. The consistency ratio CR is calculated as follows:

[0086] Calculate the largest eigenvalue λ of the judgment matrix max ;

[0087] Calculate the consistency index C I :

[0088] Calculate the consistency ratio: Where R I It is a random consistency index, which depends on the order n of the judgment matrix.

[0089] Wherein, R corresponds to the order n I The values ​​of the n-order judgment matrix corresponding to R are shown in Table 2. I value:

[0090] n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 … <![CDATA[R I ]]> 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.26 1.36 …

[0091] Table 2

[0092] S126: After the judgment matrix passes the consistency test, calculate the indicator factor weights of each indicator based on the arithmetic mean or geometric mean method of weight allocation.

[0093] In this embodiment of the application, the formula for obtaining the weights of the indicator factors by calculating the arithmetic mean method of the weight allocation of each indicator factor after the judgment matrix passes the hierarchical consistency test is as follows:

[0094]

[0095] The formula for obtaining the weights of indicator factors using the geometric mean method is:

[0096]

[0097] It should be noted that the process of obtaining the weights of indicator factors based on eigenvalues ​​is as follows: Based on the largest eigenvalue λ... max The corresponding eigenvectors are obtained, and the obtained eigenvectors are normalized to finally obtain the weight vectors.

[0098] In this embodiment, the method combines qualitative and quantitative analysis. By establishing a judgment matrix and calculating combined weights, the network security effectiveness assessment is decomposed into multiple levels, which simplifies complex decision-making problems, helps to eliminate the influence of subjective factors, and improves the objectivity and reliability of network security effectiveness assessment results.

[0099] S130: Obtain the evaluation targets in the evaluation indicator system, and perform indicator frequency analysis based on the frequency of the evaluation targets appearing in the preset sample data to determine the weight of the second indicator.

[0100] In the embodiments of this application, in the comprehensive evaluation of multiple indicators of network security, if a certain indicator appears frequently in the sample data, it indicates that the indicator has a greater impact on the evaluation results, and therefore should be given higher authority; otherwise, it should be given lower weight.

[0101] In some embodiments, S130 includes S131 to S132, wherein:

[0102] S131: Calculate the frequency of all indicators based on the frequency of each evaluation target in the preset sample data.

[0103] In this embodiment, when evaluating targets A = A1, A1…A n In the sample data, the number of times each evaluation indicator appears is counted.

[0104]

[0105] S132: Normalize the frequency of the indicators to determine the weight of the second indicator.

[0106] In this embodiment, since the dimensions of different indicators may be different, it is necessary to normalize the frequency of all indicators for evaluation and comparison:

[0107]

[0108] The weight of each indicator is determined based on the normalized frequency values.

[0109] In this embodiment, frequency analysis can be performed on network security performance evaluation indicators to determine their importance in network security.

[0110] S140: Determine the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system, and calculate and determine the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators.

[0111] In some implementations, S140 may include S141 to S142, wherein:

[0112] S141: The evaluation indicators in the evaluation indicator system are dimensionless to obtain the evaluation indicator values. The evaluation indicators include: benefit-type evaluation indicators and cost-type evaluation indicators.

[0113] In this embodiment of the application, in order to ensure the scientificity and accuracy of the evaluation matrix, all network security performance evaluation indicators need to be dimensionless. Considering that network security performance evaluation indicators have different representative meanings and value ranges, the evaluation indicators are divided into benefit indicators and cost indicators. The larger the benefit indicator value, the more beneficial it is, and the smaller the cost indicator value, the more beneficial it is.

[0114] Among them, benefit-type evaluation indicators refer to those whose larger values ​​are considered more beneficial. The dimensionless calculation formula for this type of indicator is as follows:

[0115]

[0116] In the formula, These are the maximum and minimum limits of the i-th evaluation index, respectively.

[0117] Cost-based evaluation indicators refer to indicators where a smaller value is more beneficial. The dimensionless processing method for this type of indicator is as follows:

[0118]

[0119] In the formula, These are the maximum and minimum limits of the i-th evaluation index, respectively.

[0120] S142: Sort the evaluation index values ​​according to their importance, assign scores to the sorted evaluation index values ​​according to their importance, and calculate the weight of the third index.

[0121] In this embodiment of the application, the importance of the network security performance evaluation index can be ranked according to the dimensionless network security performance evaluation index value. The ranked indexes are then classified into urgent, important, minor, and general categories, and scores are assigned accordingly.

[0122] For example, indicator x i Importance ranking and corresponding score c i As shown in Table 3:

[0123]

[0124] The formula for calculating the weight allocation based on the importance of the indicators is as follows:

[0125]

[0126] Here, represents the score assigned to the indicator in the ranking of importance of the evaluation indicators.

[0127] S150: Construct a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the weights of the first, second, and third indicators, and allocate indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm.

[0128] In some implementations, S150 includes S151 to S153.

[0129] S151: The average weight of the target evaluation index is obtained by summing and averaging the weights of the first, second, and third indicators.

[0130] S152: Calculate the sum of the average values ​​of all weights in the evaluation target based on the weights of the first indicator, the second indicator, and the third indicator.

[0131] S153: Assign comprehensive weights to target evaluation indicators based on the ratio of the weighted mean and the sum of weights.

[0132] In this embodiment, the weights w of the network security performance evaluation index obtained based on the analytic hierarchy process are... i1 Weight w obtained from indicator frequency i2 and the weights w calculated considering the importance of the indicators i3 By summing and averaging, we obtain index A. i weighted mean w j Then calculate the sum of the weighted averages of all indicators for cybersecurity performance evaluation objective A, w. k Finally, index A was calculated. i The overall weight w i.

[0133] Among them, see Figure 3 and Figure 5 , Figure 3 A schematic diagram illustrating an exemplary process for allocating indicator weights. Figure 5 A flowchart illustrating the construction process of an exemplary dynamic weight allocation algorithm.

[0134] The weights of the dynamic weight allocation index are calculated using the following formula:

[0135]

[0136] In the formula, w j Indicator A i The average weight is determined by a multi-dimensional approach that combines the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), indicator frequency, and indicator importance.

[0137]

[0138] In the formula, w k This represents the sum of the average weights of all indicators involved in the evaluation objective A, distributed across multiple dimensions such as the analytic hierarchy process, indicator frequency, and indicator importance.

[0139]

[0140] In the formula, w i Indicator A i The weights of cybersecurity performance evaluation indicators are dynamically allocated through multiple dimensions, including the analytic hierarchy process, indicator frequency, and indicator importance.

[0141] In this embodiment, network security effectiveness is evaluated based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), frequency analysis, and importance assessment. This approach can more accurately assess the importance of each indicator and assign weights to the network security effectiveness evaluation indicators accordingly. The dynamic weight allocation mechanism helps improve the accuracy of network security effectiveness evaluation results and reflects the actual situation of network security.

[0142] In summary, please refer to Figure 2 , Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating an exemplary method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to this application. By introducing a network security performance evaluation based on hierarchical and frequency analysis, a new solution is proposed to address the uncertainties in network security performance evaluation, thereby improving the stability and reliability of the evaluation results and providing a new tool for network security management.

[0143] This application establishes a multi-level indicator system, determines the importance of each indicator through frequency analysis, and adopts a dynamic weight allocation mechanism to adjust the weight of each indicator, thereby achieving a scientific and reasonable allocation of the weights of network security effectiveness assessment indicators. It has broad application prospects and practical value.

[0144] Please see Figure 6 , Figure 6 This application provides a structural block diagram of a device for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation. The device 300 includes: a modeling module 310, a first determining module 320, a second determining module 330, a third determining module 340, and an allocation module 350, wherein:

[0145] Modeling module 310 is used to establish an evaluation index system for network security effectiveness.

[0146] The first determination module 320 is used to determine the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process.

[0147] The second determining module 330 is used to obtain the evaluation targets in the evaluation indicator system and to determine the weight of the second indicator by performing indicator frequency analysis based on the frequency of the evaluation targets appearing in the preset sample data.

[0148] The third determination module 340 is used to determine the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system, and to analyze and calculate the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators.

[0149] The allocation module 350 is used to construct a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight, and to allocate indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm.

[0150] The device embodiments in this application may also include other modules, specifically corresponding to the above-described method components.

[0151] It should be noted that the device embodiments in this application correspond to the aforementioned method embodiments. The specific principles in the device embodiments can be found in the content of the aforementioned method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

[0152] In the several embodiments provided in this example, the coupling between modules can be electrical, mechanical, or other forms of coupling.

[0153] Furthermore, the functional modules in the various embodiments of the present invention can be integrated into one processing module, or each module can exist physically separately, or two or more modules can be integrated into one module. The integrated modules described above can be implemented in hardware or as software functional modules.

[0154] Please see Figure 7 , Figure 7 This application provides a structural block diagram of an electronic device 200 that can execute the above-described method for allocating index weights in a network security performance evaluation. The electronic device 200 may be a smartphone, tablet computer, computer, or portable computer.

[0155] The electronic device 200 also includes a processor 202 and a memory 204. The memory 204 stores programs that can execute the contents of the foregoing embodiments, and the processor 202 can execute the programs stored in the memory 204.

[0156] The processor 202 may include one or more cores for data processing and message matrix units. The processor 202 connects to various parts of the electronic device 200 using various interfaces and lines, and performs various functions and processes data by running or executing instructions, programs, code sets, or instruction sets stored in the memory 204, and by calling data stored in the memory 204. Optionally, the processor 202 may be implemented using at least one hardware form of Digital Signal Processing (DSP), Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), or Programmable Logic Array (PLA). The processor 202 may integrate one or more of the following: Central Processing Unit (CPU), Graphics Processing Unit (GPU), and modem / decoder. The CPU primarily handles the operating system, user interface, and applications; the GPU is responsible for rendering and drawing the displayed content; and the modem is used for wireless communication. It is understood that the modem / decoder may also not be integrated into the processor and may be implemented separately through a communication chip.

[0157] Memory 204 may include random access memory (RAM) or read-only memory (ROM). Memory 204 can be used to store instructions, programs, code, code sets, or instruction sets. Memory 204 may include a program storage area and a data storage area, wherein the program storage area may store instructions for implementing an operating system, instructions for implementing at least one function (e.g., instructions for a user to obtain random numbers), instructions for implementing the various method embodiments described below, etc. The data storage area may also store data (e.g., random numbers) created by the terminal during use.

[0158] Electronic device 200 may also include a network module and a screen. The network module is used to receive and transmit electromagnetic waves, converting electromagnetic waves into electrical signals, thereby enabling communication with communication networks or other devices, such as audio playback devices. The network module may include various existing circuit elements used to perform these functions, such as antennas, radio frequency transceivers, digital signal processors, encryption / decryption chips, SIM cards, memory, etc. The network module can communicate with various networks such as the Internet, corporate intranets, and wireless networks, or communicate with other devices via wireless networks. The aforementioned wireless networks may include cellular telephone networks, wireless local area networks, or metropolitan area networks. The screen can display interface content and facilitate data interaction.

[0159] Please refer to Figure 8 , Figure 8 This diagram illustrates a structural block diagram of a computer-readable storage medium according to an embodiment of this application. The computer-readable storage medium 400 stores program code 410, which can be called by a processor to execute the methods described in the above method embodiments.

[0160] The computer-readable storage medium 400 may be an electronic memory such as flash memory, EEPROM (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory), EPROM, hard disk, or ROM. Optionally, the computer-readable storage medium includes a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium. The computer-readable storage medium 400 has storage space for program code 410 that performs any of the method steps described above. This program code 410 can be read from or written to one or more computer program products. The program code 410 may, for example, be compressed in a suitable form.

[0161] This application also provides a computer program product or computer program that includes computer instructions stored in a computer-readable storage medium. A processor of a computer device reads the computer instructions from the computer-readable storage medium and executes the computer instructions, causing the computer device to perform a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation as described in the various optional implementations above.

[0162] The above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of this application, and are not intended to limit them. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some of the technical features. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application.

Claims

1. A method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation, characterized in that, The method includes: An evaluation index system for network security effectiveness is established, comprising: primary indicators, secondary indicators, and tertiary indicators; the primary indicators include network security effectiveness evaluation indicators, used to display the overall network security performance in the evaluation index system; the secondary indicators include technical system capability indicators, proactive defense and emergency response capability indicators, basic support capability indicators, and operational standard capability indicators, and each secondary indicator also includes a preset number of tertiary indicators; The weights of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system are determined based on the analytic hierarchy process, including: decomposing each indicator of the evaluation indicator system into a hierarchical structured indicator system according to their hierarchical relationship; comparing the indicators according to a predetermined ratio scale based on expert evaluation to determine the judgment matrix; calculating the weight value of each indicator in the judgment matrix of each level relative to the previous level; sorting the weight values ​​hierarchically and calculating the weights of all indicators relative to the first indicator of the overall goal. The evaluation targets in the evaluation index system are obtained, and the index frequency analysis is performed based on the frequency of the evaluation targets in the preset sample data to determine the weight of the second index. Determining the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system and calculating the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators includes: performing dimensionless processing on the evaluation indicators in the evaluation indicator system to obtain evaluation indicator values, wherein the evaluation indicators include: benefit-type evaluation indicators and cost-type evaluation indicators; ranking the evaluation indicator values ​​according to their importance, assigning scores to the ranked evaluation indicator values ​​according to their importance, and calculating the weight of the third indicator. A dynamic weight allocation algorithm is constructed based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight. The algorithm is used to allocate indicator weights, including: summing and averaging the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight to obtain the average weight of the target evaluation indicator; calculating the sum of the average weights of all the evaluation targets based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight; and allocating the comprehensive weight of the target evaluation indicator based on the ratio of the average weight to the sum.

2. The method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method of determining the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process also includes: The judgment matrix is ​​subjected to a consistency check, which includes: calculating the largest eigenvalue, calculating the consistency index, and calculating the consistency ratio; After the judgment matrix passes the consistency test, the weights of the corresponding index factors for each index are calculated based on the weight allocation arithmetic mean method or geometric mean method.

3. The method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of determining the weight of the second indicator by performing frequency analysis on the indicators based on the frequency of the evaluation target appearing in the preset sample data includes: Calculate the frequency of all indicators based on the frequency of each evaluation target in the preset sample data; The frequency of the index is normalized to determine the weight of the second index.

4. A device for allocating indicator weights in network security performance evaluation, characterized in that, The device includes: The modeling module is used to establish an evaluation index system for network security effectiveness. The evaluation index system includes: primary indicators, secondary indicators, and tertiary indicators. The primary indicators include network security effectiveness evaluation indicators, which are used to display the overall network security assessment in the evaluation index system. The secondary indicators include technical system capability indicators, proactive defense and emergency response capability indicators, basic support capability indicators, and operational standard capability indicators. Each secondary indicator also includes a preset number of tertiary indicators. The first determining module is used to determine the weight of each first indicator in each level of the evaluation indicator system based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). This includes: decomposing each indicator of the evaluation indicator system into a hierarchical structured indicator system according to their hierarchical relationships; comparing expert evaluations using a predetermined ratio scale to determine a judgment matrix; calculating the weight value of each indicator in each level of the judgment matrix relative to the previous level; performing a hierarchical overall sorting of the weight values; and calculating the weight of all indicators relative to the overall target as the first indicator weight. The second determining module is used to obtain the evaluation targets in the evaluation index system and perform index frequency analysis based on the frequency of the evaluation targets in the preset sample data to determine the weight of the second index. The third determining module is used to determine the importance of indicators in the evaluation indicator system and to analyze and calculate the weight of the third indicator based on the importance of the indicators. This includes: performing dimensionless processing on the evaluation indicators in the evaluation indicator system to obtain evaluation indicator values, wherein the evaluation indicators include: benefit-type evaluation indicators and cost-type evaluation indicators; ranking the evaluation indicator values ​​according to their importance, assigning scores to the ranked evaluation indicator values ​​according to their importance, and calculating the weight of the third indicator. The allocation module is used to construct a dynamic weight allocation algorithm based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight, and to allocate indicator weights based on the dynamic weight allocation algorithm, including: summing and averaging the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight to obtain the average weight of the target evaluation indicator; calculating the sum of the average weights of all the evaluation targets based on the first indicator weight, the second indicator weight, and the third indicator weight; and allocating the comprehensive weight of the target evaluation indicator based on the ratio of the average weight to the sum.

5. An electronic device, characterized in that, The electronic device includes a memory and a processor. The memory stores program code that can run on the processor. When the program code is executed by the processor, it implements a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security effectiveness assessment as described in any one of claims 1-3.

6. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores program code that can be called by one or more processors to execute a method for allocating indicator weights in a network security performance evaluation as described in any one of claims 1-3.

Images