Skip to main content
Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Policies in
the EU
Code Blue Security Conference, Tokyo 27-28 October 2022
Lorenzo Pupillo, Associate Senior Research Fellow and Head of the
Cybersecurity@CEPS Inititiative, CEPS, Brussels
ENISA Study 2021
ENISA: Project Officers
• Marnix Dekker
• Evangelos Kantas
• Slawomir Bryska
CEPS: Research Team
• Lorenzo Pupillo
• Carolina Polito
• Francesco Campoli
Wavestone Research Team
• Nick Conway
• Aude Thirriot
• Thiago Barbizan
• Solène Drugeot
• Cristian Michael Tracci
Agenda
Current state of play of CVD policies
• State of play in the EU Member States
• State of play in non-EU countries
Key findings on CVD national policies
• Level of criticality of the vulnerability treatment and
CVD processes
• Good practices on CVD policy and elements of a
CVD process
Overview of challenges and issues on CVD
national policies
• Challenges and issues related to CVD policies
• Suggestions on how to overcome CVD policy
challenges shared by interviewees
CURRENT STATE OF PLAY OF
CVD POLICIES
State of play in the EU Member States (1/3)
While evolving in a fragmented EU environment, multiple
EU Member States are making steps forward in the
development of national CVD policies but at different
paces.
• Belgium, France, Lithuania, and the Netherlands
have implemented CVD policies.
• 4 Member States are on the point of implementing a
policy: the proposal is either being examined at the
level of policymakers or is currently tested in Pilot
Projects.
State of play in the EU Member
States (2/3)
• 10 Member States are in the process of
implementing a national CVD policy. However,
failure in reaching consensus at the political or
legislative level hampered such a process.
• Finally, 9 Member States has not implemented a
CVD policy and the process for establishing one has
not yet started.
State of play in the EU Member
States (3/3)
While evolving in a fragmented
EU environment, multiple EU
Member States are making
steps forward in the
development of national CVD
policies but at different paces.
Implementation of CVD policy at national level in Europe
KEY FINDINGS ON CVD
NATIONAL POLICIES
Level of criticality of the
vulnerability treatment LIFECYCLE
and CVD processes
• Discovery: to reduce a vulnerability’s
harmfulness, someone has to discover it
in the first place.
• Handling: If the vulnerability is in a
product’s code (code vulnerability), the
‘code owner’ needs to develop mitigation
and distribute it to all users
(‘vulnerability handling’).
• Management: if the vulnerability is a
misconfiguration or unapplied mitigation
(often a patch) in an information system
(system vulnerability), the ‘system
owner’ needs to manage it, i.e., apply the
patch or change the system or product
configuration as soon as possible.
• Disclosure: In most cases, code
vulnerability information needs to be
disclosed publicly or at least to the
security community or targeted
audiences
9
GOOD
PRACTICES ON
CVD POLICY
AND
ELEMENTS OF
A CVD
PROCESS
Content of a CVD Policy
• The CVD policy shall contain a description of the
mutual obligations of the involved parties, namely:
• Authorization to Access the Computer System
(Proportionality)
• Information required to report a vulnerability
• Confidentiality
• Procedural deadlines (within 90 days)
• Communication channels
• Reward to Security researchers
• Public disclosure
GOOD PRACTICES ON CVD
POLICY AND ELEMENTS OF A
CVD PROCESS
Member States have highlighted a series of procedures they have implemented that should be regarded as best practices:
• References to two standards: ISO/IEC 2914741 (disclosing vulnerability) and ISO/IEC 3011142 (processing procedures for the
reported vulnerability
• Bottom-up Approach (The Netherlands)
• Talk to the vendors
• Familiarise with the ethical hackers community
• Insulate the information
• Implement the OECD’s recommendations/good practices
• Adopt the Common Security Advisory Framework
ZOOMING on SOME
Elements of CVD processes
• Entities involved: role of the national CERT and/or the National
Cybersecurity Authority: (observer or central role )
• Tools: dedicated website, implementation of ticketing systems,
custom tools (Cuckoo Sandbox), validation tools (Burp suite),
warning and information systems (Common Security Advisory
Framework), communication tools especially in multiparty
processes, find vulnerabilities through opensource intelligence
software
• Awareness raising campaigns: Lithuania: Cybersec Breakfast;
The Netherlands: Hack right
• Operational and crisis management activities
OVERVIEW OF CHALLENGES
AND ISSUES ON
CVDNATIONAL POLICIES
CHALLENGES
AND ISSUES
RELATED TO
CVD POLICIES
Overview of the
challenges
LEGAL CHALLENGES
• Criminal law: According to the Cybercrime Convention, intentionally accessing a computer system
without rights is a criminal offence.
• Copyright law: Researchers can breach copyright law when the information disclosed entails
portions of copyrighted code. The vulnerability owners can establish exemptions, enabling the
possibility of safe harbours
• Data protection law: Researchers, discovering vulnerabilities may access personal data which
could be interpreted as a breach of data protection law.
• Contract Law: Bug bounty policies and in some cases vulnerability disclosure policies represent the
terms of a contract between the vulnerability owner and the researcher. Breaching the terms of
the contract entails legal liability and risks for the researcher,
• Export control legislation and regulation are often cited as a legal risk for researchers as they may
apply to tools and knowledge used to discover vulnerabilities
Other
CHALLENGES
Economic Challenges Political challenges
• Vulnerabilities and software market
dynamics
• Lack of cooperation among
stakeholders
• Limited market incentives for
security researchers to participate in
CVD programs
• Most security researchers are
activists not professionals employed
by private companies
• Lack of resources and skills to
implement CVD polices
• Cost of implementation and
operation of CVD policies are
considered as relatively less
impactful
• Top Down or Bottom-up Approach
• The role of Government
• Updating imperfect cybercrime
and Intellectual Property
frameworks
• Support and enable CVD policies
• Leading by example in
establishing CVD policies
(adapting CVD within the
government, etc..)
• The role of the private sector
• Leader or follower?
Overcome
the
challenges
Overcome the Legal Challenges
• Two questions relating to the link of vulnerabilities discovery and criminal
offence:
• Circumstances under which finding vulnerabilities may be associated with
criminal offense (substantial).
• Conditions to be met for any crimes associated with finding vulnerabilities
to be prosecuted (procedural).
• Since according to the Budapest Convention only the ‘unauthorised access
should be considered as criminal offence’, computer system owners can
authorise access through the publication of a CVD policy; EU countries could
implement CVD policies that will offer a limited liability waiver to security
researchers.
• Since Criminal Law is a prerogative of Member States , they could amend their
criminal law to create the legal certainty for security researchers.
• The EU could amend the 2013/40/EU Cybercrime Directive to offer legal
certainty to security researchers.
• The protection of security researchers could also be achieved by recognising
the status of whistle-blower in the sense of Directive 2019/1937.
• It would be helpful to define the role of ethical hackers: a law could be
drafted defining ad-hoc criteria.
Overcome
the
challenges
• Overcome the economic challenges
• Promote appropriate policies aimed at encouraging security researchers to actively
participate in CVD programmes
• Specific role for bug bounty programmes: should the EU set up a program or rather
harmonise regulation an practices across the EU Member States?
• Support to research programmes to foster CVD policies among public and private
researchers in Europe (Digital Europe Programme and Horizon Europe)
• The EU should make available funding and programmes to train people and make
viable the development of CVD policies in the EU
• Overcome the political challenges
• Top Down or Bottom-up Approach: An EU approach could take the form of a common
model of CVD at the EU level, promoting coordination at the EU and international
level.
• The role of Government:
• Updating cybercrime and intellectual property frameworks to better protect
security researchers, for example through ‘safe harbours’,
• Leading by example in the establishment of a CVD policy (e.g., CVD within the
government, etc.)
• The role of the private sector:
• Private entities should not wait for government policy interventions and define CVD
polices to publish on the organisation’s website.
CVD in NIS 2
• The Directive also establishes a framework for
Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure and
requires Member States to designate CSIRTs to
act as trusted intermediaries and facilitate the
interaction between the reporting entities and
the manufacturers or providers of ICT products
and ICT services. ENISA is required to develop
and maintain a European vulnerability registry
for the discovered vulnerabilities.
CVD and
Cyber
Resilience
Act
1 Place du Congres, 1000 Brussels
Tel: (+32 2)229 39 11
info@ceps.eu
Thank You! @CEPS_ThinkTank