Alexandre Dulaunoy<p>I love the <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@github" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>github</span></a></span> Security Advisory Database because they actually preserve the data from rejected advisories including the original information and the reason for rejection.</p><p>It’s clearly much more insightful than just having a bare ID marked as "rejected."</p><p>You can easily spot this in vulnerability-lookup: <a href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-54371#related" rel="nofollow noopener" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cv</span><span class="invisible">e-2025-54371#related</span></a></p><p>Yet another great example of why having diverse sources for vulnerability data matters.</p><p><a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/cve" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>cve</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/vulnerability" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>vulnerability</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/vulnerabilitymanagement" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>vulnerabilitymanagement</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/cybersecurity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>cybersecurity</span></a></p>