CTI STIX Subcommittee

 View Only
  • 1.  Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 11:14
    Hey, y'all - Somehow this escaped me until now. Was this an intentional decision or is this an accidental omission? -- Cheers, Trey Darley Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC CTI Strategist, CERT.be -- CERT.be Centre for Cyber Security Belgium Mail: trey.darley@cert.be GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550 6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E -- Under the authority of the Prime Minister Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium Contact: https://www.cert.be Attachment: signature.asc Description: PGP signature


  • 2.  Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 11:39
    You could say the
    same thing for Attack Pattern. This goes back
    to the "TTP objects vs non-TTP objects" discussion from last
    week's working call & Brett's spreadsheet. There are a subset of SDOs
    which are used to communicate TTPs, that when you look at them objectively
    *should* have a common set of base properties. But we did not do that,
    there is a lot of inconsistency. - Jason Keirstead Lead Architect - IBM Security Connect www.ibm.com/security "Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple,
    really. Double your rate of failure." - Thomas J. Watson From:
            Trey
    Darley <trey.darley@cert.be> To:
            OASIS
    CTI TC STIX SC list <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Date:
            06/14/2019
    08:13 AM Subject:
            [EXTERNAL]
    [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not
    on Threat Actor? Sent
    by:         <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Hey, y'all - Somehow this escaped me until now. Was this an intentional decision or is this an accidental omission? -- Cheers, Trey Darley Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC CTI Strategist, CERT.be -- CERT.be Centre for Cyber Security Belgium Mail: trey.darley@cert.be GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550  6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E -- Under the authority of the Prime Minister Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium Contact: https://www.cert.be [attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Jason Keirstead/CanEast/IBM]




  • 3.  Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 12:02



    Based on the consensus on the call we added aliases to the rest of the TTP objects, aka infrastructure and attack pattern.  


    Before we ship we should have one last review of base properties on SDOs and SROs (not SCOs) and make sure everything makes sense.


    Bret 

    Sent from my Commodore 128D


    PGP
    Fingerprint:  63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050


    On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Jason Keirstead < Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com > wrote:



    You could say the same thing for Attack Pattern.

    This goes back to the "TTP objects vs non-TTP objects" discussion from last week's working call & Brett's spreadsheet. There are a subset of SDOs which are used to communicate TTPs, that when you look at
    them objectively *should* have a common set of base properties. But we did not do that, there is a lot of inconsistency.



    -
    Jason Keirstead
    Lead Architect - IBM Security Connect
    www.ibm.com/security

    "Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple, really. Double your rate of failure."

    - Thomas J. Watson



    From:         Trey Darley < trey.darley@cert.be >
    To:         OASIS CTI TC STIX SC list < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Date:         06/14/2019 08:13 AM
    Subject:         [EXTERNAL] [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?
    Sent by:         < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >




    Hey, y'all -

    Somehow this escaped me until now. Was this an intentional decision or
    is this an accidental omission?

    --
    Cheers,
    Trey Darley
    Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC
    CTI Strategist, CERT.be
    --
    CERT.be
    Centre for Cyber Security Belgium
    Mail: trey.darley@cert.be
    GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550  6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E
    --
    Under the authority of the Prime Minister
    Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium
    Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium
    Contact: https://www.cert.be
    [attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Jason Keirstead/CanEast/IBM]










  • 4.  Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 12:04



    As far as adding first and last seen, I think that is also an option we should look at.


    Bret 

    Sent from my Commodore 128D


    PGP
    Fingerprint:  63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050


    On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Jason Keirstead < Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com > wrote:



    You could say the same thing for Attack Pattern.

    This goes back to the "TTP objects vs non-TTP objects" discussion from last week's working call & Brett's spreadsheet. There are a subset of SDOs which are used to communicate TTPs, that when you look at
    them objectively *should* have a common set of base properties. But we did not do that, there is a lot of inconsistency.



    -
    Jason Keirstead
    Lead Architect - IBM Security Connect
    www.ibm.com/security

    "Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple, really. Double your rate of failure."

    - Thomas J. Watson



    From:         Trey Darley < trey.darley@cert.be >
    To:         OASIS CTI TC STIX SC list < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Date:         06/14/2019 08:13 AM
    Subject:         [EXTERNAL] [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?
    Sent by:         < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >




    Hey, y'all -

    Somehow this escaped me until now. Was this an intentional decision or
    is this an accidental omission?

    --
    Cheers,
    Trey Darley
    Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC
    CTI Strategist, CERT.be
    --
    CERT.be
    Centre for Cyber Security Belgium
    Mail: trey.darley@cert.be
    GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550  6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E
    --
    Under the authority of the Prime Minister
    Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium
    Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium
    Contact: https://www.cert.be
    [attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Jason Keirstead/CanEast/IBM]










  • 5.  Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 12:08



    Trey,


    Please add a suggestion in the document so we can talk about it next week


    Bret 

    Sent from my Commodore 128D


    PGP
    Fingerprint:  63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050


    On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Jason Keirstead < Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com > wrote:



    You could say the same thing for Attack Pattern.

    This goes back to the "TTP objects vs non-TTP objects" discussion from last week's working call & Brett's spreadsheet. There are a subset of SDOs which are used to communicate TTPs, that when you look at
    them objectively *should* have a common set of base properties. But we did not do that, there is a lot of inconsistency.



    -
    Jason Keirstead
    Lead Architect - IBM Security Connect
    www.ibm.com/security

    "Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple, really. Double your rate of failure."

    - Thomas J. Watson



    From:         Trey Darley < trey.darley@cert.be >
    To:         OASIS CTI TC STIX SC list < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Date:         06/14/2019 08:13 AM
    Subject:         [EXTERNAL] [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?
    Sent by:         < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >




    Hey, y'all -

    Somehow this escaped me until now. Was this an intentional decision or
    is this an accidental omission?

    --
    Cheers,
    Trey Darley
    Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC
    CTI Strategist, CERT.be
    --
    CERT.be
    Centre for Cyber Security Belgium
    Mail: trey.darley@cert.be
    GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550  6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E
    --
    Under the authority of the Prime Minister
    Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium
    Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium
    Contact: https://www.cert.be
    [attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Jason Keirstead/CanEast/IBM]










  • 6.  Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 12:25
    On 14.06.2019 12:07:30, Bret Jordan wrote: > > Please add a suggestion in the document so we can talk about it next > week > Done and done. But did we not agree to cancel next week's working call due to FIRST? -- Cheers, Trey Darley Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC CTI Strategist, CERT.be -- CERT.be Centre for Cyber Security Belgium Mail: trey.darley@cert.be GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550 6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E -- Under the authority of the Prime Minister Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium Contact: https://www.cert.be Attachment: signature.asc Description: PGP signature


  • 7.  Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] Why do we have first_seen / last_seen on Intrusion Set but not on Threat Actor?

    Posted 06-14-2019 16:11



    We moved the full tc call, but not the working call.  Maybe we need to do that 


    Bret 

    Sent from my Commodore 128D


    PGP
    Fingerprint:  63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050


    On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:25 PM, Trey Darley < trey.darley@cert.be > wrote:



    On 14.06.2019 12:07:30, Bret Jordan wrote:


    Please add a suggestion in the document so we can talk about it next

    week




    Done and done.

    But did we not agree to cancel next week's working call due to FIRST?

    --
    Cheers,
    Trey Darley
    Co-Chair, OASIS CTI TC
    CTI Strategist, CERT.be
    --
    CERT.be
    Centre for Cyber Security Belgium
    Mail: trey.darley@cert.be
    GPG: CA5B 29E4 937E 151E 2550  6607 AE9A 7FF2 8000 0E4E
    --
    Under the authority of the Prime Minister
    Wetstraat 16 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium
    Visiting address : Rue Ducale 4 â 1000 Brussels â Belgium
    Contact:
    https://clicktime.symantec.com/32EaRzLqHH1mz531LPMtE6o7Vc?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cert.be