FWIW this would potentially be overcome by the top-level relationship construct. Though, for things like indicator composition and the observable within an indicator you would probably not use that construct.
Aharon and Sean, how do you want to handle these types of discussions to work towards a decision? I know on the MITRE lists we would have these discussions and they would sometimes kind of peter out without a solid consensus. Any thoughts on how to avoid
that here?
John
From: "Jordan, Bret"
Date: Monday, July 27, 2015 at 12:33 PM
To: Aharon Chernin
Cc: "Wunder, John A.", Jason Keirstead, Trey Darley, "
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org "
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] Proposal - Change Report Object
Agreed.. We need to talk through this and think about it. We need to weigh the value of it and its complexity and impossibility to implement, versus something much easier to understand and easier to implement. Some of the existing constructs in STIX I think
need to be dropped and replaced in whole with something easier to understand and use. Composite indicators might be one of those case, but I have not spent enough time thinking about them yet. Too focused on other areas that are hemorrhaging.
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."
On Jul 27, 2015, at 10:28, Aharon Chernin <
achernin@soltra.com > wrote:
In general, I favor referencing over inline. The only thing I haven't put much thought on is how I feel about requiring referencing when doing something like composite indicators.
Aharon Chernin
CTO
SOLTRA
An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company
18301 Bermuda green Dr
Tampa, fl 33647
813.470.2173
achernin@soltra.com www.soltra.com From:
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Jordan, Bret <
bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 12:19 PM
To: Wunder, John A.
Cc: Jason Keirstead; Trey Darley;
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [cti-stix] Proposal - Change Report Object
I could go with that...
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."
On Jul 27, 2015, at 10:07, Wunder, John A. <
jwunder@mitre.org > wrote:
I'm going to throw out there that we should make ALL relationships between top-level constructs reference only. That would include Report, but also things like TTPs in Indicators, etc.
From: <
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Jason Keirstead
Date: Monday, July 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM
To: Trey Darley
Cc: "Jordan, Bret", "
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org "
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] Re: Proposal - Change Report Object
I also +1 this if we are counting votes.
-
Jason Keirstead
Product Architect, Security Intelligence, IBM Security Systems
www.ibm.com/security www.securityintelligence.com Without data, all you are is just another person with an opinion - Unknown
<graycol.gif> Trey Darley ---2015/07/27 12:13:59 PM---+100, Bret! Cheers,
From: Trey Darley <
trey@soltra.com >
To: "Jordan, Bret" <
bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, "
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org "
<
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
Date: 2015/07/27 12:13 PM
Subject: [cti-stix] Re: Proposal - Change Report Object
Sent by: <
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
+100, Bret!
Cheers,
Trey
--
Trey Darley
Senior Security Engineer
Soltra An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company
www.soltra.com From:
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org >
on behalf of Jordan, Bret <
bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 16:57
To:
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [cti-stix] Proposal - Change Report Object
In STIX 2.0 I would like to propose that we change the Report Object to contain just reference to the objects that it is binding. I do not want to see it contain data itself.
[soap box]
We need one way of doing things and the current data-model of STIX, while beautiful, makes writing a decision tree in code for some arbitrary data in a STIX package nearly impossible. .
[/soap box]
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."
<graycol.gif>