AI Visibility Intelligence · Security Citation Verification
Every security id on your pages, checked against the authority that issued it.
Security content lives or dies on its identifiers. GrackerAI resolves every CVE, CWE, ATT&CK, CAPEC and NIST reference against the issuing body, verifies active-exploit claims against the CISA KEV catalog, and strips fabricated ids out of generated drafts before they reach your site.
"…mitigated by controls described in NIST SP 800-207, and tracked as CVE-2024-99821, currently under active exploitation."
→
After verification
NIST SP 800-207 exists in the NIST catalog — kept, link checked
CVE-2024-99821 not found at NVD — stripped before publish
Active-exploitation claim not listed on CISA KEV — flagged critical
Illustrative example. The identifiers shown are checked live against NVD, MITRE, NIST and the CISA KEV catalog.
Why identifiers decide citation
In security content, the citation is the credibility.
Every other category can get away with a loose reference. Security cannot, because the identifiers are checkable and the audience checks them.
Problem one
A wrong id is worse than no id
A security page that cites CVE-2024-3400 for the wrong product does not read as slightly off. To an engine weighing whether to quote you, it reads as a source that does not check itself, and the whole page gets discounted with it.
Problem two
Language models invent identifiers
Identifiers are exactly the shape a model is good at imitating and bad at recalling. A generated security article will produce a plausible CVE number with a plausible description attached, and nothing in a normal editing pass catches it.
Problem three
Nobody re-checks last year's page
The standards link you added eighteen months ago still looks fine in the editor. It can 404, point at a withdrawn publication, or sit three sections away from the claim it was supposed to support, and no ordinary audit will tell you.
Frameworks resolved
Five identifier systems, each checked against the body that maintains it
An identifier is only meaningful if it resolves. GrackerAI holds a resolver for each of these, so a reference on your page can be confirmed to exist rather than assumed to.
CVENVD / MITRE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures
Publicly disclosed vulnerabilities with assigned CVE ids and CVSS ratings.
CWEMITRE
Common Weakness Enumeration
Structured dictionary of software and hardware weakness types, such as SQL injection or XSS.
ATT&CKMITRE
MITRE ATT&CK Framework
Knowledge base of adversary tactics, techniques and real-world attack behaviours.
CAPECMITRE
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification
Catalog of common attack patterns used to exploit weaknesses.
D3FENDMITRE / NSA
Detection, Denial, and Disruption Framework Empowering Network Defense
Knowledge graph of defensive countermeasures, mapped to the offensive techniques they counter.
The Standards layer
The AEO audit scores standards as its own layer
Alongside technical, content and AEO readiness, every security-relevant page gets a Standards score. It runs in four stages, and a reference has to survive all four to earn full credit.
1
Present
Notice
Is the body actually linked, not just named?
NIST is backed by a real link to a nist.gov source, not a text mention
MITRE is backed by a real link — mitre.org for CWE, ATT&CK or CAPEC, NVD or cve.org for a CVE
CISA is backed by a real link for an active-exploit citation
2
Live
Notice
Does the link still resolve?
The NIST link still resolves and has not gone dead
The MITRE link still resolves and has not gone dead
The CISA link still resolves and has not gone dead
3
Real
Critical
Does the identifier exist at the authority?
A named NIST publication such as SP 800-53 or FIPS 197 is verified against NIST's own catalog
A named MITRE id — CVE, CWE, ATT&CK or CAPEC — is verified against MITRE's data
An active-exploitation claim is verified against CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
4
Relevant
Warning
Does the reference support the claim beside it?
The NIST reference is about the nearby topic, not merely present on the page
The MITRE reference is about the nearby topic, not merely present on the page
The CISA reference is about the nearby topic, not merely present on the page
Checks only apply where the page's topic calls for them, so a pricing page is never marked down for failing to cite MITRE.
Active-exploit claims
“Actively exploited” is a claim, and it gets verified like one
It is the single most repeated line in vulnerability marketing and the easiest to get wrong. If a page says a vulnerability is under active exploitation, GrackerAI checks that against CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog and marks an unverified claim critical.
Listed on KEV
The claim stands, and the page keeps the credit for making it.
Not listed on KEV
Flagged critical, with the fix spelled out: verify the claim against a source, or remove it. An unverified active-exploit claim costs more trust than it buys.
Generated content
A model cannot cite an id that was never resolved
The guardrail is structural rather than editorial. Identifiers are resolved against the authorities first, and anything the model writes that is not in that resolved set does not survive into the draft.
How the guardrail works
Identifiers are resolved against the authority before the draft is written
Any id the model produced that is not in the resolved set is stripped out
What survives is the set that was verified, not the set that sounded right
Where verification is enforced
Standards scores as its own layer, beside technical, content and AEO
A fabricated or mistyped id is a critical finding, not a footnote
Every finding arrives with the fix written out, not just a red flag
Automated topic sweep
The vulnerabilities worth writing about find you
Security moves faster than a content calendar. GrackerAI sweeps new CVEs and security news on a schedule, scores each one for how exploitable it is and how much it touches your products, and turns what survives into monitored prompts.
Signal
Weight
Where it comes from
Listed in the CISA KEV catalog
35%
Decays from the date CISA added it, on a 30-day half-life
EPSS exploit-prediction probability
30%
Pulled per-CVE from FIRST.org
CVSS severity
15%
Normalised from the NVD record
Publication recency
12%
30-day half-life from disclosure
Ransomware-linked
8%
Flagged from the KEV entry
Exploitability is only half of it. Each candidate is also bucketed by how closely it touches you, and the two are combined before anything becomes a prompt.
Full weight
Your own products
Matched against the product names and keywords on your brand profile
0.8
Named competitors
The vulnerabilities and stories your buyers will compare you against
0.6
Category-level
Movement in your category that shapes the answer without naming anyone
New CVEs and security news are swept automatically on a schedule
Each item is scored for exploitability and for relevance to your products
What survives becomes monitored prompts, deduplicated and capped per product
Sources of record
Every check resolves against a primary source
No intermediary databases and no scraped mirrors. Each identifier is confirmed at the body that issues it.
Source
What it is
What GrackerAI uses it for
NVD
NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVE records, CVSS severity, product matching
CISA KEV
Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
Whether a vulnerability is genuinely being exploited
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org
Probability a vulnerability gets exploited
MITRE
CWE, ATT&CK and CAPEC catalogs
Weakness, technique and attack-pattern ids
NIST CSRC
Computer Security Resource Center
Publication ids such as SP 800-53 and FIPS 197
Related
Verification is one layer. Here is what it feeds.
Technical AEO Audit
Standards is scored inside the audit, alongside technical, content and AEO readiness, page by page across your site.
Start your 7-day free trial and get your AI Visibility Score in about a minute. See exactly where you stand, where competitors are beating you, and the ranked fixes to get into the answer. Cancel anytime before the trial ends.