Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41094845›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Towards Optimal Sensor Placement for Cybersecurity: An Extensible Model for Defensive Cybersecurity Sensor Placement Evaluation.

Neal Wagner, Suresh K Damodaran, Michael Reavey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Neal WagnerThe MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730, USA.
Suresh K DamodaranThe MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730, USA.
Michael ReaveyThe MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730, USA.

Funding

U.S. Government FA8702-24-C-0001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimal sensor placement (OSP) is concerned with determining a configuration for a collection of sensors, including sensor type, number, and location, that yields the best evaluation according to a predefined measure of efficacy. Central to the OSP problem is the need for a method to evaluate candidate sensor configurations. Despite the wide use of cybersecurity sensors for the protection of network systems against cyber attacks, there is limited research focused on OSP for defensive cybersecurity, and limited research on evaluation methods for cybersecurity sensor configurations that consider both the sensor data source locations and the sensor analytics/rules used. This paper seeks to address these gaps by providing an extensible mathematical model for the evaluation of cybersecurity sensor configurations, including sensor data source locations and analytics, meant to defend against cyber attacks. We demonstrate model usage via a case study on a representative network system subject to multi-step attacks that employ real cyber attack techniques recorded in the MITRE ATT&CK knowledge base and protected by a configuration of defensive cybersecurity sensors. The proposed model supports the potential for adaptation of techniques and methods developed for OSP in other problem domains than the cybersecurity domain.

Indexed as

cybersecuritycyber sensorcyber threat modelingmathematical modelingoptimal sensor placementrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID41094845
PMCPMC12526620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.