Internal Node Id Dependent on Order of Action Execution

The order of vulnerability execution defines the order that __discovered_nodes are added internally. There is functionality in place that uses this integer value for downstream tasks. (1, 2, 3, 4, etc)

This also means that the action masking is dependent on the order of vulnerability execution (repro)

Doesn't that mean that during training, the state-action value approximations are based on an integer encoding that changes according to the order of actions at every reset? Checkpointing or transfer learning would also suffer.

For ports, local/remote vulnerabilities, etc you use model.Environment.identifiers when retrieving via integer encoding, so they're fixed.

Let me know if you need any clarification, or if I'm missing something here.

Thanks!

Start in cyberbattle/_env/cyberbattle_env.py at the referenced uses of __discovered_nodes and compare them with model.Environment.identifiers. Run the linked internal_id_error.ipynb reproduction and compare resets with different vulnerability execution orders; done should establish whether internal IDs and action masking remain consistent for training and checkpoint or transfer scenarios.