CY公的機関
Cybermalveillance.gouv.fr
Assistance and awareness resources for French audiences.
国際サイバーポータル / DIRECTORY
世界の専門知識をつなぐ。
公的機関、対応チーム、企業、研究。国や課題に合った情報源を見つけましょう。
FIRSTプロフィールの分布 · 883
スナップショット内の件数 : 883 ·
- Government, Private and Public sectors
252 / 883 252 - Other commercial
207 / 883 207 - Industrial sector
95 / 883 95 - Financial sector
94 / 883 94 - ICT vendor customer base
57 / 883 57 - 部門の記載なし
50 / 883 50 - Government & military
46 / 883 46 - Research & education
45 / 883 45 - ISP customer base
37 / 883 37
国と部門だけでは対応範囲は判断できません。公式プロフィールで条件を確認してください。 FIRST ↗
IN研究・教育
Inria
Research in digital science and technology.
NC公的機関
NCSC · United Kingdom
Technical guidance, alerts and protection resources.
IN公的機関
INCIBE
Cybersecurity resources for businesses and citizens.
CE公的機関
CERT.br
Incident response and security awareness in Brazil.
IP公的機関
IPA · Japan
Information security, software and digital skills.
NA防衛
NATO CCDCOE
Cyber defence research, training and exercises.
IT公的機関
ITU · Cybersecurity
International cooperation and digital capacity building.
OWコミュニティ・標準
OWASP Foundation
Open projects for application and AI security.
AR研究・教育
arXiv
Scientific preprints; peer review is not guaranteed.
HU民間企業
Hugging Face
AI models, datasets and open tools.
PO民間企業
PortSwigger Web Security Academy
Web security learning in authorised labs.
BEコミュニティ・標準
Bellingcat
Open-source verification methods and resources.
FIコミュニティ・標準
FIRST · CVSS
Vulnerability severity specification and calculators. A score alone does not describe organisation-specific risk.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- CVSS 4.0 scores run from 0.0 to 10.0. Base, Threat, Environmental and Supplemental metric groups serve different purposes.
- 利用方法
- Retain the score version, vector and date. Compare it with the installed version, access paths and business consequences before ordering remediation.
- 留意する限界
- A high score is not evidence of exploitation; a low score does not mean a service has no risk.
資料確認日
CVSS・EPSS・KEV・VEX
What is the technical severity under the assessed metrics?
The score proves neither exploitation nor consequences for your service.
Read the CVSS, EPSS, KEV and VEX reference →
Primary sources and scope
- FIRST · CVSS 4.0 Specification · CVSS 4.0 · document 1.2 · reviewed 2026-10-22
Overview · Assessment · Nomenclature · Supplemental Metrics
Sources checked on
CVコミュニティ・標準
CVE Program
Public vulnerability identifiers and records. Check products, affected versions and links to original advisories.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- A JSON schema defines the CVE record format. An identifier and the published contents of its record are distinct things.
- 利用方法
- Open the record and references; check its state, described affected versions and supplier information. Keep the identifier in action tracking.
- 留意する限界
- A CVE identifier is neither a severity score nor proof that your installation is affected.
資料確認日
NI公的機関
NIST · National Vulnerability Database
Vulnerability database and technical enrichment. Cross-check records against vendor advisories and the deployed configuration.
NI公的機関
NIST · AI Risk Management Framework
Voluntary framework and resources for documenting AI risks. Check the version and status of consulted documents.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- The AI RMF Core is organised around Govern, Map, Measure and Manage. It is a voluntary risk-management framework.
- 利用方法
- Define intended use, affected people and error consequences. Connect each risk to an evaluation, owner and stop or recovery mechanism.
- 留意する限界
- The framework certifies neither a model nor an application. Using it does not remove the need to examine applicable requirements.
資料確認日
OWコミュニティ・標準
OWASP · GenAI Security Project
Open risk reference for LLM and generative AI applications, including prompt injection, disclosure and excessive permissions.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- The 2025 edition includes Prompt Injection, Sensitive Information Disclosure and Excessive Agency.
- 利用方法
- Turn a risk into an observable scenario: hostile document, restricted data or out-of-scope tool. Record expected behaviour and evidence of refusal.
- 留意する限界
- A risk list is not a complete assessment. Input filtering alone does not establish authorisation for every action.
資料確認日
RAG：アクセス権、引用、キャッシュ
An accurate answer can disclose a forbidden document. Retrieval relevance, citation validity and access authorisation are separate checks. The service providing passages must enforce the current identity’s rights before exposing them to the model.
- OWASP · LLM08:2025 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses · 2025
- OWASP · LLM01:2025 Prompt Injection · 2025
- OWASP · LLM06:2025 Excessive Agency · 2025
- OWASP · LLM05:2025 Improper Output Handling · 2025
- OWASP · LLM07:2025 System Prompt Leakage · 2025
- OWASP · LLM10:2025 Unbounded Consumption · 2025
- OWASP · API1:2023 Broken Object Level Authorization · 2023
Explore the RAG access matrix and replay cases →
References consulted on
W3コミュニティ・標準
W3C · Web Accessibility Initiative
Standards, evaluation methods and web accessibility resources. Supports complete journey testing beyond automated checks.
GO民間企業
Google · Search Central
Official documentation on crawling, indexing and AI features in Google Search. Does not guarantee rankings or citations.
IAコミュニティ・標準
IANA · Protocol Registries
Internet protocol parameter registries and related references. Use to check codes and numbers against their standardised context.
MI研究・教育
MITRE · Common Weakness Enumeration
Name classes of software and hardware weakness.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- A CWE describes a weakness that can contribute to vulnerabilities. It does not represent a particular incident.
- 利用方法
- Connect the weakness to the observed mechanism: input, processing and missing control. Use it to fix the cause and plan regression tests.
- 留意する限界
- A keyword in a report alone does not establish the correct CWE classification.
資料確認日
W3コミュニティ・標準
W3C · WCAG 2.2
Evaluate accessibility criteria for web content.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- WCAG 2.2 is a W3C Recommendation. Success criteria have A, AA and AAA levels.
- 利用方法
- Define tasks, pages and states, then combine inspection, keyboard, zoom and relevant assistive technology. Keep reproduction steps for barriers.
- 留意する限界
- An automated scanner does not establish conformity of a complete journey. Evaluation must cover interactive states and actual content.
資料確認日
GO民間企業
Google · Core Web Vitals
Distinguish loading, responsiveness and visual stability.
資料の詳細
- 確認済みのデータ・指標
- Good thresholds are LCP ≤ 2.5 s, INP ≤ 200 ms and CLS ≤ 0.1 at the 75th percentile, segmented by mobile and desktop.
- 利用方法
- Separate field measurement from laboratory tests. Record period, URL, device, population and sample size before comparing changes.
- 留意する限界
- These thresholds are not measured results for this site. A good lab score alone does not establish visitor experience.
資料確認日