Question for MITRE about "Attack Type" in CVE request form

To: cve-editorial-board-list <cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
Subject: Question for MITRE about "Attack Type" in CVE request form
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 20:24:14 -0700
Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is 129.83.29.3) smtp.mailfrom=LISTS.MITRE.ORG; mitre.mail.onmicrosoft.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;mitre.mail.onmicrosoft.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=redhat.com;mitre.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
Delivery-date: Tue Nov 8 06:45:18 2016
List-help: <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTS.MITRE.ORG?body=INFO%20CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST>
List-owner: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-subscribe-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
Sender: <owner-cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
Spamdiagnosticmetadata: 6cdb8bfc89744bd8bfee511e3e65aa05
Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:2

You have the values:

Context-dependent

Definition

Local

Physical

Remote

which doesn't really map to anything like CVSSv2/3 directly, I'm just wondering where this is from?

--
Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud
PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert@redhat.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Question for MITRE about "Attack Type" in CVE request form
  - From: jericho <jericho@attrition.org>

Prev by Date: Re: DWF Open Source CNA requirements:
Next by Date: Re: Question for MITRE about "Attack Type" in CVE request form
Previous by thread: Re: DWF Open Source CNA requirements:
Next by thread: Re: Question for MITRE about "Attack Type" in CVE request form
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread