CTI STIX Subcommittee

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Re: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal

  • 1.  Re: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal

    Posted 12-01-2015 20:05





    I support this list 100%.


    sean









    From: " cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
    Date: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 2:31 PM
    To: " cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Subject: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal





    All,


    In an effort to resolve the endless timestamp debate and come to consensus, Mark, John Wunder, Jason, and I had a lively chat on Slack and have all agreed to give and take to come to middle ground on the following.  We would therefor like to propose
    the following as an official proposal for timestamps in STIX 2.0.  Is everyone okay with this?


    1) Timestamps MUST follow RFC 3339 with the following extra requirements 
    2) Timestamps MUST use the timezone offset
    3) Timestamps MUST use the following format yyyy-mm-ddThh:mm:ss.mmmmmm+-hh:mm
    4) There will be an optional precision field (timestamp-precision) with the following string values: year, month, day, hour, minute, second. If precision is omitted, the default value of precision is "microsecond"
    5) When using the precision field, unknown values MUST be zeroed out












    Thanks,




    Bret












    Bret Jordan CISSP

    Director of Security Architecture and Standards Office of the CTO

    Blue Coat Systems

    PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
    "Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg." 


















  • 2.  RE: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal

    Posted 12-01-2015 20:32




    I support this list 100% too.
     
     

    Terry MacDonald
    Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert
    SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company
    +61 (407) 203 206
    terry@soltra.com
     

     


    From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org]
    On Behalf Of Barnum, Sean D.
    Sent: Wednesday, 2 December 2015 7:05 AM
    To: Jordan, Bret <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com>; cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: Re: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal


     



    I support this list 100%.


     


    sean




     


    From:
    " cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of "Jordan,
    Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
    Date: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 2:31 PM
    To: " cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Subject: [cti-stix] Timestamps - Proposal


     



    All,


     


    In an effort to resolve the endless timestamp debate and come to consensus, Mark, John Wunder, Jason, and I had a lively chat on Slack and have all agreed to give
    and take to come to middle ground on the following.  We would therefor like to propose the following as an official proposal for timestamps in STIX 2.0.  Is everyone okay with this?


     


    1) Timestamps MUST follow RFC 3339 with the following extra requirements 
    2) Timestamps MUST use the timezone offset
    3) Timestamps MUST use the following format yyyy-mm-ddThh:mm:ss.mmmmmm+-hh:mm
    4) There will be an optional precision field (timestamp-precision) with the following string values: year, month, day, hour, minute, second. If precision is omitted, the default value of precision is "microsecond"
    5) When using the precision field, unknown values MUST be zeroed out







     


    Thanks,


     


    Bret



     


     


     



    Bret Jordan CISSP


    Director of Security Architecture and Standards Office of the CTO


    Blue Coat Systems



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


    "Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg."