Thinking about scope of coverage.
CVE traditionally covers:
vulnerability
weakness
I mean it's literally in the name.
For the GSD I'm thinking we should also cover:
malware
not exhaustively of course, but it drives me nuts that there's no good naming for high profile ones/big events
exploitation
e.g. where there's smoke there's usually fire
exploit code
e.g. we may have a piece of malicious code, we're not sure of the exact exploit/mechanism but we know it does something bad
incident
something bad happened, possibly using a new vuln/weakness/etc
backdoor / honeypot / deceptive software
I need a better name for this, maybe it's one category, maybe it's not)
Some examples of these:
Weakness: weird DLL loading issues in windows system utilities that I certainly never knew about and I'm betting less than 1% of MCSE's are even aware can exist.
https://github.com/cloudsecurityalliance/gsd-database/blob/main/2022/1000xxx/GSD-2022-1000003.jsondeceptive software: The Norton Crypto Miner which is just a classic gift card balance scheme
https://github.com/cloudsecurityalliance/gsd-database/blob/main/2022/1000xxx/GSD-2022-1000002.jsonOn the incident/honeypot side we have this rather clever Ethereum contract rugpull that netted about $100,000 USD:
https://github.com/cloudsecurityalliance/gsd-database/blob/main/2022/1000xxx/GSD-2022-1000004.jsonAnd this fascinating Twitter thread about some hashrate shenanigans on some chains that share a common hash function:
https://twitter.com/ohgodagirl/status/1476438702003933185?s=11Which is a percect example of "nothing bad happened... right? but... did someone just test a new weapon?" basically.
I didn't write it up because sourcing it all will take ages and I'm lazy.
 | Kurt Seifried (He/Him) Chief Blockchain Officer and Director of Special Projects Cloud Security Alliance |