Unlike traditional network models that rely on static topology or IP-based reachability, ULM abstracts the network as a system of heterogeneous linkages — logical, organizational and functional — not just physical. This allows defenders to model paths that adversaries actually use, such as identity trust chains, software dependencies or implicit API adjacencies.
ULM vs. existing models
There are many common cybersecurity modeling approaches between ULM and existing security models. Each contributes to a better understanding of the threat environment while generally addressing a specific aspect — software components, attacker goals, network reachability or vulnerability spread. However, no other model offers a unified structural view. The ULM integrates adjacency, inheritance and trustworthiness, bridging threat intelligence and vulnerability analysis to reveal systemic risk pathways.
| Model | Focus | Primary Use |
| SBOM Dependency Graphs | Static component structure | Software inventory, license compliance, vulnerability scanning |
| Attack Trees | Logical attacker goals and sub-goals | Threat modeling |
| Attack Graphs | State transitions and network reachability | Penetration testing, lateral movement analysis |
| Vulnerability Propagation Models | How flaws spread through dependencies | Blast radius analysis, patch prioritization |
| ULM | Structural linkages: adjacency, inheritance, trustworthiness | Integrating threat and vulnerability views; systemic risk analysis |
ULM is not dependent upon a single phenomenon. It can describe software supply chains, network topologies, identity infrastructures and organizational relationships using a common vocabulary of linkages. This flexibility makes it a robust foundation for integrating threat assessments, vulnerability analyses and architectural models.
