Citation Sources and Traceability for Cybersecurity

What the data for this category looks like

Data sources for cybersecurity intelligent due diligence reports targeting financial institutions include financial internal network asset scan results, public vulnerability databases, industry threat intelligence sources, and system log audit data. Update frequency varies by data source type: vulnerability database data is synced in real time, asset scan data is generated on demand or updated weekly.

The document structure uses a single asset, single vulnerability entry as the basic unit. It includes fields such as financial asset identifier, vulnerability ID, risk level, remediation suggestion, scan time, and threat correlation information. Field formats follow industry standard formats adopted by most institutions. Asset identifiers are IP or domain name strings. Vulnerability IDs use CVE standard formats. Risk levels are enumeration values of low, medium, high, critical. Scan times use ISO 8601 format timestamps.

Constraints for Citation Sources and Traceability

Multi-source heterogeneous data sources require associating data source versions and generation nodes during traceability. This avoids mixing results from different scan tasks, and ensures the accuracy of internal asset traceability for financial institutions.

Standardized and unique field requirements demand precise matching of core identifiers such as CVE IDs and asset IPs during traceability. Relying solely on full-text keyword recall cannot meet precise positioning needs.

Individual report content is lengthy and contains high-value details. Traceability must locate specific entries, rather than using entire documents as traceability basis. This avoids missing key risk information for financial assets.

Asset data generated on demand must be bound to specific scan task IDs. This ensures traceability can be traced back to the original scan action. Relying solely on static document content cannot fully reflect the data generation background.

How to Configure Settings

Configuration Item	Recommended Value	Rationale
`recall_top_k`	8-12 entries	Cybersecurity intelligent due diligence reports contain multi-dimensional correlation fields, requiring sufficient associated entries to ensure traceability completeness
`similarity_threshold`	0.75-0.85	Precise matching of unique identifier fields such as CVE IDs and asset IPs is required, to avoid recalling irrelevant results with low matching degrees
`parse_segment_length`	1200 characters	The core content of individual vulnerability reports is moderately long; this value avoids truncating remediation suggestions or threat correlation descriptions
`source_field_extract`	Enabled and specify `cve_id, asset_ip, scan_time`	Extract core traceability fields from cybersecurity reports, ensuring quick location of specific vulnerability entries during citation
`reference_display_mode`	Group by data source	Report formats generated by different scanning tools vary significantly; grouping clearly distinguishes traceability information from different sources
`reference_citation_style`	Retain original field names	Aligns with industry viewing habits for cybersecurity report traceability, enabling technical personnel to quickly identify key information

The parameter values provided on this page are common starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require specific analysis. It is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.

Three Common Mistakes

Phenomenon: Only document file names are displayed in citation results, and core traceability fields such as CVE IDs and asset IPs are not shown. Cause: The source_field_extract configuration is not enabled, or required fields such as cve_id and asset_ip are not specified.
Phenomenon: A 400 Bad Request error is returned when a query is initiated, with a prompt that the variable format is invalid. Cause: Standard variable formats supported by the platform are not used, and non-standard nested object syntax is incorrectly used.
Phenomenon: Recalled citation entries do not match the query content, and a large number of irrelevant vulnerability reports appear. Cause: The similarity_threshold is set too low, resulting in recall of low-correlation results with insufficient matching degrees.

How to Confirm Successful Configuration

Upload a standard cybersecurity intelligent due diligence report. View the parsed field list, and confirm that specified fields such as cve_id, asset_ip, and scan_time have been extracted.
Initiate a query containing a specific asset IP or CVE ID. Check whether the returned citation results are displayed grouped by data source and include the corresponding field information.
View the parsing logs in the platform backend. Confirm that no error prompts such as parse_timeout or invalid_citation_format appear.
Adjust similarity_threshold to different values. Verify whether the matching degree changes of recalled results meet expectations.

Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.