Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

Automated implementation of windows-related security-configuration guides

Patrick Stöckle, Bernd Grobauer, Alexander PretschnerPublished Dec 21, 2020
DOI Publisher
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Missing
Not verified yet
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.

Hardening is the process of configuring IT systems to ensure the security of\nthe systems' components and data they process or store. The complexity of\ncontemporary IT infrastructures, however, renders manual security hardening and\nmaintenance a daunting task.\n In many organizations, security-configuration guides expressed in the SCAP\n(Security Content Automation Protocol) are used as a basis for hardening, but\nthese guides by themselves provide no means for automatically implementing the\nrequired configurations.\n In this paper, we propose an approach to automatically extract the relevant\ninformation from publicly available security-configuration guides for Windows\noperating systems using natural language processing. In a second step, the\nextracted information is verified using the information of available settings\nstored in the Windows Administrative Template files, in which the majority of\nWindows configuration settings is defined.\n We show that our implementation of this approach can extract and implement\n83% of the rules without any manual effort and 96% with minimal manual effort.\nFurthermore, we conduct a study with 12 state-of-the-art guides consisting of\n2014 rules with automatic checks and show that our tooling can implement at\nleast 97% of them correctly. We have thus significantly reduced the effort of\nsecuring systems based on existing security-configuration guides.\n

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: cold
Hardening is the process of configuring IT systems to ensure the security of\nthe systems' components and data they process or store.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Aug 24, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

9

Citations

34

References

Tasks

Computer science, Automation, Process (computing), Task (project management), Software engineering, Database, Operating system

Methods

None detected

Domains

Computer security

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers