A rectification recommendation method and device in a level protection evaluation process

Abstract

The application discloses a rectification recommendation method and equipment in a level protection evaluation process, and the method comprises the following steps: S1, acquiring a measured object set and a rectification measure set; S2, based on an evaluation item, respectively calculating the score values of the measured objects in the current measured object set after being rectified by each rectification measure in the current rectification measure set; S3, determining the influence of the current rectification measure set on the measured objects in the current measured object set according to the score values; S4, determining the optimal rectification measure according to the influence, and updating the current measured object set and the current rectification measure set, then returning to the above S2 to continue execution until the optimal rectification measure set is obtained when the updated measured object set is empty. The application can assist the evaluation personnel to rectify multiple measured objects with the least rectification measures, thereby improving the rectification efficiency, and ensuring the scientificity and effectiveness of the rectification measures.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of computer technology, specifically relating to a rectification recommendation method and equipment in the process of graded protection assessment. Background Technology

[0002] With the increasing emphasis placed on cybersecurity by the state, more and more information systems are being included in the requirements of the graded protection assessment. However, in practice, graded protection assessment agencies often face a challenge: they need to assess multiple tested objects simultaneously, each with multiple issues requiring rectification. Faced with this complex scenario of multiple tested objects and multiple issues requiring rectification, assessors often feel at a loss, struggling to find the optimal rectification path to ensure all tested objects reach the target score as quickly as possible. In the case of a single tested object, the conventional approach is to prioritize resolving high-risk and high-weight issues to improve the graded protection assessment score and conclusion. However, when facing multiple tested objects, comprehensively considering the issues of all objects and rationally selecting rectification measures among them to quickly formulate an optimal rectification path is usually a challenge and highly dependent on the experience of the assessors. In other words, there is an urgent need for an efficient rectification recommendation method for complex scenarios with multiple tested objects and multiple issues requiring rectification. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the aforementioned problems in the existing technology, this invention provides a rectification recommendation method and equipment for the graded protection assessment process.

[0004] The technical problem to be solved by this invention is achieved through the following technical solution:

[0005] This invention provides a rectification recommendation method during the graded protection assessment process, comprising:

[0006] S1. Obtain a set of test objects containing b test objects and a set of rectification measures containing n rectification measures; each test object has multiple evaluation items;

[0007] S2. Based on multiple evaluation items for each of the tested objects in the current set of tested objects, calculate the bonus value of each tested object after rectification by each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures, and obtain an overall bonus value matrix; n and n are positive integers greater than 1;

[0008] S3. Based on the overall score matrix, determine the impact of the current set of rectification measures on all tested objects in the current set of tested objects, and obtain the impact summary matrix;

[0009] S4. Determine an optimal rectification measure based on the impact summary matrix, and update the current set of tested objects and the current set of rectification measures based on the optimal rectification measure. Then, return to S2 above and continue execution until the updated set of tested objects is empty, and stop to obtain the optimal set of rectification measures.

[0010] The present invention also provides an electronic device, including a processor, a communication interface, a memory, and a communication bus, wherein the processor, the communication interface, and the memory communicate with each other through the communication bus;

[0011] The memory is used to store computer programs;

[0012] When the processor executes the program stored in the memory, it implements the steps of the rectification recommendation method in the above-mentioned graded protection assessment process.

[0013] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows:

[0014] This invention proposes a rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process. This method is specifically designed for assessment projects involving multiple tested objects and complex problems encountered during rectification. Through multiple iterations, it can quickly generate the optimal rectification solution, helping assessors quickly identify common problems among multiple tested objects and providing targeted rectification suggestions. This assists assessors in rectifying multiple tested objects using the fewest possible rectification measures, improving rectification efficiency and ensuring the scientific validity and effectiveness of rectification measures. It also reduces, to some extent, the reliance on the assessor's personal experience during the rectification of complex scenarios.

[0015] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. Attached Figure Description

[0016] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process provided by an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0017] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to specific embodiments, but the implementation of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0018] Before introducing the technical solution of this invention, we will first introduce the basis for determining the assessment conclusion of a single tested object in the grade protection assessment and the scoring formula.

[0019] The criteria for determining the rating conclusion of a single subject are shown in Table 1:

[0020] Table 1

[0021]

[0022] The overall score is calculated as follows:

[0023] Let M be the overall score of the tested object, M = V t +V m V t and V m Calculate using the following formula:

[0024]

[0025]

[0026] Where y is the attention coefficient, ranging from 0 to 1, provided by the graded protection management department, with a default value of 0.5. n is the total number of evaluation items involved in the tested object (excluding inapplicable items, the same below), t is the total number of technical evaluation items, and V t V represents the score for technical aspects, m represents the total number of assessment items for management aspects, and V represents the score for technical aspects. m For management-related scores, ω k To determine the importance of assessment item k (categorized as general, important, and critical), x k For the score of assessment item k, if assessment item k involves multiple assessment objects, then x k The value is the arithmetic mean of the scores of multiple assessment subjects.

[0027] x k The scores are calculated as shown in Table 2:

[0028] Table 2

[0029]

[0030] When the evaluation item k involves multiple objects, the score for each object is 1, 0.5, or 0.

[0031] The minimum condition for successfully passing the assessment is a comprehensive score of 70 or higher without any high risk. This means that the sum of the deductions for management and technical categories should be less than or equal to 30. Therefore, in the subsequent method description of this invention, the case where the deduction for either the technical or management category is greater than or equal to 50 will not be considered.

[0032] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a rectification recommendation method during the graded protection assessment process provided by an embodiment of the present invention, as shown below. Figure 1 As shown, the method includes:

[0033] S1. Obtain a set of test objects containing n test objects and a set of rectification measures containing m rectification measures; each test object has multiple evaluation items.

[0034] S2. Based on the multiple evaluation items of each tested object in the current set of tested objects, calculate the bonus value of the tested object after each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures, and obtain an overall bonus value matrix; n and m are positive integers greater than 1.

[0035] S3. Based on the overall bonus value matrix, determine the impact of the current set of rectification measures on all tested objects in the current set of tested objects, and obtain the impact summary matrix.

[0036] S4. Determine an optimal rectification measure based on the impact summary matrix, and update the current set of tested objects and the current set of rectification measures based on the optimal rectification measure. Then, return to S2 above and continue execution until the updated set of tested objects is empty, and stop to obtain the optimal set of rectification measures.

[0037] In some embodiments, S2 above is achieved through the following steps:

[0038] S21. Based on multiple evaluation items for each tested object in the current set of tested objects, calculate the pre-rectification score of the tested object.

[0039] Here, the pre-rectification score V of the j-th tested object is... j The expression is as follows:

[0040]

[0041] in, Represents the k-th element of the j-th tested object. j The score of each evaluation item before rectification, where j ranges from 1 to 0, and 0 represents the total number of objects in the current set of objects being tested. When the current set of objects being tested is the set of objects being tested in S1 above, then O = n. j k represents the total number of evaluation items for the j-th subject. j Represents the k-th element of the j-th tested object. j Each assessment item Represents the k-th element of the j-th tested object. j The importance of each assessment item. It should be noted that... The calculation method is the same as the above x k The calculation method is the same. The calculation method is the same as the above ω k The calculation method is the same, specifically whether it is general, important, or critical.

[0042] S22. Based on the rectification effect of each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures on each evaluation item of the tested object, calculate the score of the tested object after rectification of the evaluation item by the rectification measure. Based on the scores of all evaluation items of the tested object after rectification by the rectification measure, calculate the score of the tested object after rectification by the rectification measure.

[0043] Here, the i-th rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures affects the k-th measure of the j-th tested object. j The rectification effect of each evaluation item f(∝) i ,k j The following are possible outcomes: Invalid, Partially Compliant, and Compliant. Invalid means the corrective action is ineffective for the assessment item; Partially Compliant means the corrective action can be rectified to partial compliance when the indicator is non-compliant; Compliant means the corrective action can be rectified to compliance when the indicator is either partially compliant or non-compliant. i ,k j ) is represented as: Where i takes values ​​from 1 to Z, and Z represents the total number of rectification measures in the current rectification measure set. When the current rectification measure set is the rectification measure set in S1 above, then Z = m.

[0044] Here, the k-th element of the j-th tested object j The score after rectification of each evaluation item by the i-th rectification measure The expression is as follows:

[0045]

[0046] in, Indicates the kth j The number of non-compliant assessment subjects involved in each assessment item. Indicates the kth j The total number of assessment subjects involved in each assessment item.

[0047] Here, the score V of the j-th tested object after rectification by the i-th rectification measure is... ij The expression is as follows:

[0048]

[0049] S23. Calculate the difference between the score after rectification and the score before rectification for each rectification measure in the current rectification measure set for the tested object, and obtain the bonus value of the tested object corresponding to each rectification measure in the current rectification measure set; wherein, the bonus values ​​of all tested objects in the current tested object set constitute an overall bonus value matrix.

[0050] Here, the bonus value for the one-to-one correspondence between the j-th tested object and the i-th rectification measure is: ΔV ij =V ij -V j .

[0051] Here, when the current set of rectification measures is the same as the set of rectification measures in S1 above, and the current set of tested objects is the same as the set of tested objects in S1 above, then the resulting overall scoring matrix ΔV can be expressed as: Where i′ takes values ​​from 2 to m, and j′ takes values ​​from 2 to n.

[0052] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned S3 is implemented through the following steps:

[0053] S31. Based on the overall bonus value matrix, determine the number of test objects that each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures can affect, and the sum of the bonus values ​​of the test objects that the rectification measure can affect and the corresponding bonus values ​​of the rectification measures, to obtain a row matrix of the rectification measure; the row matrix is ​​composed of the number of test objects that the rectification measure can affect and the sum of the bonus values.

[0054] Here, the i-th row of the overall bonus value matrix represents the bonus value corresponding one-to-one with the i-th rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures for all tested objects in the current set of tested objects. Based on this, specifically, the number of non-zero elements in the i-th row of the overall bonus value matrix is ​​taken as the number of tested objects num that the i-th rectification measure can affect. i , i.e., num i =nnz(ΔV(i,:)), where ΔV represents the overall bonus value matrix; the sum of the non-zero elements in the i-th row of the overall bonus value matrix is ​​taken as the sum of the bonus values ​​ΔSumV of the tested objects affected by the i-th rectification measure, corresponding one-to-one with the i-th rectification measure. i ,Right now Then, num i and ΔSumV i The constructed row matrix [num] has 2 elements. i ΔSumV i ], which is a row matrix for the i-th rectification measure.

[0055] S32. Using the row matrix of all rectification measures in the current rectification measure set, construct a Z-row, 2-column impact summary matrix, where Z represents the total number of rectification measures in the current rectification measure set.

[0056] Here, when the current set of corrective measures is the same as the set of corrective measures in S1 above, and the current set of tested objects is the same as the set of tested objects in S1 above, the resulting impact summary matrix "correction" can be expressed as: Where i′ takes values ​​from 2 to m, and j′ takes values ​​from 2 to n.

[0057] In some embodiments, determining an optimal remedial measure based on the impact summary matrix in S4 above can be achieved through the following steps:

[0058] S41. Based on the size of the elements in the first column, sort the influence summary matrix in reverse order; and when two or more elements in the first column are the same, sort the influence matrix in reverse order a second time based on the size of the elements in the second column of the influence summary matrix that are in the same position as the two or more elements.

[0059] S42. After sorting the influence matrix, a sorted influence summary matrix is ​​obtained; where each row of the sorted influence summary matrix corresponds one-to-one with a rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures.

[0060] S43. Take the corrective measure corresponding to the first row element in the sorted impact summary matrix as the optimal corrective measure.

[0061] Specifically, for each correction, it is sorted in descending order of num. If the num values ​​are the same, it is sorted by ΔSumV, resulting in a new impact summary matrix, correction_sort. The correction measures that affect more tested objects and have the greatest overall score improvement are listed in the first row of correction_sort. Therefore, the optimal correction measure is the one that affects the most tested objects and has the highest score improvement.

[0062] In some embodiments, updating the current set of tested objects and the current set of rectification measures based on the optimal rectification measures in S4 above can be achieved through the following steps:

[0063] S44. Remove the best rectification measure from the current set of rectification measures to obtain the updated set of current rectification measures, and add the best rectification measure to the set of best rectification measures, correction_path.

[0064] S45. Calculate the optimal rectification measures and the new rectification score of each tested object after rectification of each tested object in the current set of tested objects.

[0065] It should be noted that after the optimal rectification measures are implemented on a tested object, the calculation principle for the new rectification score of that object is the same as the aforementioned v. ij The calculation principle.

[0066] S46. Determine whether the new rectification score of the tested object is greater than or equal to the expected score V_target of the tested object.

[0067] It should be noted that the expected score V_target for each tested object is set by the user according to actual needs, and the expected score V_target for different tested objects can be the same or different.

[0068] S47. When the new rectification score of the tested object is greater than or equal to the expected score of the tested object, the tested object is removed from the current set of tested objects to obtain the updated current set of tested objects.

[0069] S48. When the new rectification score of the tested object is less than the expected score of the tested object, the current set of tested objects is used as the updated current set of tested objects.

[0070] It should be noted that when the updated current set of tested objects is empty, it means that at this time, the scores of all tested objects in the initially obtained set of tested objects have reached the expected scores. That is, all the optimal rectification measures in the final set of optimal rectification measures are measures that can effectively rectify all tested objects in the initially obtained set of tested objects.

[0071] This invention proposes an intelligent rectification recommendation method for assessment projects involving multiple test objects. Through multiple iterations, it can effectively obtain the shortest rectification path, assisting assessors in using the fewest rectification measures to rectify multiple test objects, thereby improving rectification efficiency. This reduces, to some extent, the reliance on the individual experience of assessors during the rectification process in this complex scenario.

[0072] It should be noted that the terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of technical features indicated. Therefore, features defined as "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more features. In the description of this invention, "a plurality of" means two or more, unless otherwise explicitly specified.

[0073] In the description of this specification, the references to terms such as "one embodiment," "some embodiments," "example," "specific example," or "some examples," etc., indicate that a specific feature or characteristic described in connection with that embodiment or example is included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. In this specification, the illustrative expressions of the above terms do not necessarily refer to the same embodiment or example. Moreover, the specific features or characteristics described may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments or examples. Furthermore, those skilled in the art can combine and integrate the different embodiments or examples described in this specification.

[0074] In this specification, the word "comprising" does not exclude other components or steps, and "a" or "an" does not exclude multiple instances. While different embodiments may describe certain measures, this does not mean that these measures cannot be combined to produce a good effect.

[0075] The above description, in conjunction with specific preferred embodiments, provides a further detailed explanation of the present invention. It should not be construed that the specific implementation of the present invention is limited to these descriptions. For those skilled in the art, various simple deductions or substitutions can be made without departing from the concept of the present invention, and all such modifications and substitutions should be considered within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for recommending rectification measures during the graded protection assessment process, characterized in that, include: S1, Get the contents The set of test objects and containing A set of rectification measures; each tested object has multiple evaluation items; S2. Based on multiple evaluation items for each of the tested objects in the current set of tested objects, calculate the bonus value of each tested object after rectification by each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures, and obtain an overall bonus value matrix. and It is a positive integer greater than 1; S31. Based on the overall bonus value matrix, determine the number of test objects that each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures can affect, and the sum of the bonus values ​​of the test objects that the rectification measures can affect and the corresponding rectification measures, to obtain a row matrix of the rectification measures; the row matrix is ​​composed of the number of test objects that the rectification measures can affect and the sum of the bonus values. S32. Using the row matrix of all the rectification measures in the current set of rectification measures, a The impact summary matrix is ​​in row 2 and column 2, where, This represents the total number of rectification measures in the current set of rectification measures; S4. Determine an optimal rectification measure based on the impact summary matrix, and update the current set of tested objects and the current set of rectification measures based on the optimal rectification measure. Then, return to S2 above and continue execution until the updated set of tested objects is empty, and stop to obtain the optimal set of rectification measures.

2. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 1, characterized in that, S2 includes: S21. Based on multiple evaluation items for each of the tested objects in the current set of tested objects, calculate the pre-rectification score of the tested object; S22. Based on the rectification effect of each rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures on each evaluation item of the tested object, calculate the rectification score of the evaluation item of the tested object after rectification by the rectification measures. Based on the rectification scores of multiple evaluation items of the tested object after rectification by the rectification measures, calculate the rectification score of the tested object after rectification by the rectification measures. S23. Calculate the difference between the score after rectification and the score before rectification for each rectification measure in the current rectification measure set for the tested object, and obtain the bonus value of the tested object corresponding to each rectification measure in the current rectification measure set; wherein, the bonus values ​​of all the tested objects in the current set of tested objects constitute an overall bonus value matrix.

3. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 2, characterized in that, No. The tested object went through the first Score after rectification of each rectification measure The expression is as follows: ； ； in, The value ranges from 1 to , This represents the total number of objects under test in the current set of objects under test. The value ranges from 1 to , Indicates the first The total number of assessment items for each subject being tested. Indicates the first The first of the tested objects Each assessment item Indicates the first The first of the tested objects The importance of each assessment item Indicates the first The first of the tested objects The assessment item was evaluated after the first... The score after rectification of each rectification measure.

4. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 1, characterized in that, The first of the overall bonus value matrix The row is the sum of all the tested objects in the current set of tested objects and the row in the current set of corrective measures. Each rectification measure corresponds to a specific bonus point; among them... The value ranges from 1 to Based on this, S31 includes: S311, the first value in the overall scoring matrix... The number of non-zero elements in the row is used as the number of the first row. The number of tested objects that can be affected by each rectification measure; S312, the first value in the overall scoring matrix The sum of the non-zero elements in the row is used as the first... The rectification measures can affect the tested objects and the first... The sum of the bonus points corresponding to each rectification measure; S313, the first The number of tested objects affected by each rectification measure, and the sum of the bonus values, form a row matrix, which serves as the basis for the calculation of the first rectification measure. A row matrix of rectification measures.

5. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 1, characterized in that, Determining an optimal remedial measure based on the impact summary matrix in step S4 includes: S41. Based on the size of the elements in the first column, the influence summary matrix is ​​sorted in reverse order; and when two or more elements in the first column are the same, the influence summary matrix is ​​sorted in reverse order a second time based on the size of the elements in the second column of the influence summary matrix that are in the same position as the two or more elements. S42. After sorting the impact summary matrix, a sorted impact summary matrix is ​​obtained; wherein, each row of the sorted impact summary matrix corresponds one-to-one with a rectification measure in the current set of rectification measures; S43. Take the corrective measure corresponding to the first row element in the sorted impact summary matrix as the optimal corrective measure.

6. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step S4, which updates the current set of tested objects and the current set of rectification measures based on the optimal rectification measures, includes: S44. Remove the optimal rectification measure from the current set of rectification measures to obtain an updated set of current rectification measures, and add the optimal rectification measure to the set of optimal rectification measures; S45. Calculate the new rectification score of each of the tested objects after the optimal rectification measures are implemented on each of the tested objects in the current set of tested objects. S46. Determine whether the new rectification score of the tested object is greater than or equal to the expected score of the tested object; S47. When the new rectification score of the tested object is greater than or equal to the expected score of the tested object, the tested object is removed from the current set of tested objects to obtain an updated current set of tested objects. S48. When the new rectification score of the tested object is less than the expected score of the tested object, the current set of tested objects is used as the updated current set of tested objects.

7. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 3, characterized in that, The first The score of the tested object before rectification The expression is as follows: ； in, Indicates the first The first of the tested objects The score of each evaluation item before rectification.

8. The rectification recommendation method in the graded protection assessment process according to claim 2, characterized in that, The rectification measures have one of the following effects on the evaluation items of the tested object: invalid, partially compliant, and compliant.

9. An electronic device, comprising a processor, a communication interface, a memory, and a communication bus, characterized in that, The processor, the communication interface, and the memory communicate with each other via the communication bus; The memory is used to store computer programs; When the processor executes a program stored in the memory, it implements the steps of the method described in any one of claims 1-8.

Images