البوابة السيبرانية الدولية / DIRECTORY
مؤسسات عامة وفرق استجابة وشركات وأبحاث. اعثر على المصادر المناسبة لبلدك واحتياجاتك.
ملفات في لقطة البيانات : 883 ·
لا يحدّد بلد الملف وقطاعه نطاق التدخل. تحقّق من الشروط في الملف الرسمي. FIRST ↗
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
تاريخ جلب البيانات · FIRST
Identify vulnerabilities listed by CISA as known to be exploited.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Is the vulnerability listed as known to be exploited?
Listing does not establish that the product exists in your estate; absence does not establish safety.
Read the CVSS, EPSS, KEV and VEX reference →
Sources checked on
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
Entries preserve the CVE identifier, vendor or project, product, dates, action and published indicators. The schema distinguishes required and optional fields; absence must not silently become a negative value.
The data’s CC0 licence grants no rights to CISA’s logo or content on linked third-party websites.
1754 السجلات · 2026.10.21
مرجع رسمي ↗Name classes of software and hardware weakness.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Prepare incident response within cybersecurity risk management.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Qualifying a signal, preserving investigative material and restoring a service answer different questions. CSF 2.0 distinguishes recovery initiation, integrity of restoration assets, validation of restored assets and the end of recovery. These are outcomes to document, not certification or one mandatory procedure.
The twelve entries below are a selected, paraphrased part of CSF 2.0. Evidence columns, timelines and injects are original teaching proposals. They do not replace a local plan and imply no universal timing, severity level or authority. SP 800-61 Revision 3 has been final since April 2025 and supersedes Revision 2.
Explore NIST outcomes and the timeline →
Identifiers and outcome meanings come from CSF 2.0; SP 800-61r3 adds incident response and recovery recommendations. Evidence tables, times and scenarios are educational, with no client results, certification or actual notification.
References reviewed
Describe threat intelligence through structured objects and relationships.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Structured intelligence retains provenance and a version history. For an actionable OSINT note, separate collected facts, the producer’s assertion and the local conclusion, then state what still needs confirmation.
Version note: at review time the OASIS latest-stage URL points to a document dated 2 April 2025 titled STIX 2.1 Errata 01, incorporating Draft 01. Its draft errata status is retained in the citation; it is not presented as a newly approved final version. Agree marking encodings with the recipient and check the edition actually used.
Read the STIX, observations and TLP sharing reference →
Sources checked on
Exchange threat intelligence through an application protocol.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Exchange bills of materials and supply-chain information.
تاريخ مراجعة الوثائق
Official Chrome permission reference: APIs, declarations and conditions for site access.
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
Vendor reference for permission names, declarations, temporary access and API-specific requirements. The CIE guide connects a selection of 20 names to review questions. Granted settings, policies and behaviour cannot be read from a manifest alone. The reading covers activeTab, cookies, identity and nativeMessaging among others.
Read the permission directory and manifest examples →
Google Chrome · Permissions · Documentation consulted 2026-10-23; browser behaviour remains version-dependent
Edge policy documentation for managing permissions, site access and extension installation.
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
Administrative documentation distinguishing permission blocking, runtime-host restrictions and installation rules. A blocked permission can disable an extension without uninstalling it. Policy patterns must not be confused with Chrome manifest match patterns.
Read the permission directory and manifest examples →
Microsoft Learn · Manage Microsoft Edge extensions using group policies · Enterprise policy documentation consulted 2026-10-23
SP 800-88 Revision 2: Clear, Purge and Destroy methods, sanitization program and evidence.
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
The final Revision 2 of 26 September 2025 supersedes withdrawn Revision 1. It distinguishes technical verification from outcome validation and addresses cryptographic erase and logical storage. The FAQ of 16 July 2026 complements it. The 20 CIE-SAN references are editorial selection linked to sections, not NIST certification.
Read the methods, evidence points and annotated situations →
NIST · SP 800-88 Rev. 2 · Guidelines for Media Sanitization · Final · 2025-09-26 · consulted 2026-10-23
NIST · FAQ for SP 800-88r2 · Published 2026-07-16 · consulted 2026-10-23
The syslog Parameters registry publishes facility and severity codes as well as structured-data identifiers. This selection covers only the 24 facilities and 8 severities.
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
IANA maintains the value registry; RFC 5424 describes the format. Notes about overlapping codes and local families help prevent assigning product meaning or incident urgency to a single number. The educational calculator uses a dated copy without accessing real logs.
Read syslog codes and try the PRI calculation →
IANA · syslog Parameters · Registry updated 2016-04-26 · consulted 2026-10-23
IETF · R. Gerhards · RFC 5424 · The Syslog Protocol · March 2009 · §6.2.1 PRI · §6 format · §8 security
The HTTP Problem Types registry associates URI, title, recommended HTTP status and reference. This dated copy contains six entries, including about:blank and three digest entries whose draft-kind references are preserved.
الملاحظات المرجعية المفصّلة متاحة باللغة الإنجليزية في هذه النسخة.
The registry can verify a common problem identity. It lists neither every application type nor certified servers, and does not replace distinguishing received HTTP status from advisory body status. The guide workshop provides eight fictional responses for testing this reading.
Explore problem types and eight fictional responses →
IANA · HTTP Problem Types · Registry updated 2026-06-26 · consulted 2026-10-23
IETF · M. Nottingham, E. Wilde, S. Dalal · RFC 9457 · July 2023 · obsoletes RFC 7807 · §3.1, §3.2, §4.2, §5