CTI STIX Subcommittee

Expand all | Collapse all

Re: [cti-stix] Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO

  • 1.  Re: [cti-stix] Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO

    Posted 09-01-2017 14:34




    Here would be our list.
     
    Desired Goals for CTI treatment of cyber investigation information:


    Near seamless transition of information (observables, identities, locations, etc.) from cyber investigation (digital forensics, malware analysis, IR, etc.)
     tools to CTI tools Explicit provenance of information (from CTI to how it was derived to the investigation where the info came from to the information within the investigation
    to how the information was discovered/extracted/derived) for purposes of Confidence Near seamless transition of CTI into cyber investigations for contextual correlation and understanding Extract indicators from cyber investigations Sightings referencing the Alert that represents the sighting (primarily internal use) Automated COA prescription or even execution during Trigger/Triage based on Alerts (these may transition system, sub-organization or even organization boundaries) Automated COA prescription or even execution during informal and formal investigation phases Derive victim targeting from cross-investigation analysis TTP trending from cross-investigation analysis ThreatActor <-> TTP use temporal analysis from cross-investigation analysis Incident summary reporting (e.g. US-CERT)
     
     
     
    We also had a few comments on the sketchboard content:


    The two flows on the sketchboard don’t seem like use cases so much as specific implementation workflows supporting use cases. Things like open ticket/close
    ticket seem too specific for general use cases. Many orgs might follow a similar general flow but not specific elements of the flows depicted. We suggest the key for STIX to focus on are the arrows to and from the green boxes. These represent CTI derived from and fed to cyber investigations which are
    clearly within scope for STIX. The light blue boxes and the pink boxes are the domain of cyber investigation and out of scope directly for STIX.

    The questions to ask are:

    Which elements (and at what granularity) out of cyber investigations are relevant for CTI analysis/enrichment? How to structure CTI information fed into cyber investigations such that it is as seamless as possible?


     
     
     

    Sean Barnum
    Principal Architect
    FireEye
    M: 703.473.8262

    E: sean.barnum@fireeye.com
     

    From: <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>
    Date: Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 3:55 PM
    To: Sarah Kelley <Sarah.Kelley@cisecurity.org>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>
    Subject: [cti-stix] Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO


     


    My features / goals I would like out of this/these objects are:
     
    1) Ability to do automated incident reporting to internal/external groups/organizations (think reporting to US-Cert). Information should be parsable by a computer and indexable 
     
    2) Ability to gather a bunch of post-IR reports and look for patterns of Threat Actor / Intrusion Set behavior. 
     
    A nice to have would be:
     
    3) Ability for various SOC tools that do IR based ticketing / workflow to share information in STIX format. 
     
    Bret





    From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Sarah Kelley <Sarah.Kelley@cisecurity.org>
    Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:17:34 AM
    To: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO


     



    All,
     
    Given some of the extremely prolific conversations that have happened recently (mostly on Slack, but also in email) about the Event SDO, we’re going to take a slightly different approach to this object.
     
    It seems clear from the conversations that not everyone is in agreement on what we’re attempting to model, so trying to determine if the draft SDO we have will work poses a challenge. Many different stages
    or types of objects have been proposed, from an alert/event, to an investigation, to a collection/grouping, to a post-IR type reporting mechanism. That being said, we need to come to some sort of agreement on WHAT we’re trying to represent before we can determine
    if we’re doing in the right way.
     
    The co-chairs believe it would be valuable to do a reset on this object. We should take a step back from where we have been and come to a better understanding of where we need to be. We are in
    no way going to throw out any of the work that has already been done. We want to have a focused conversation about what end-to-end work flows people are currently using that fall into this realm, starting from something as simple as a logline,
    and going to as far down the analysis and notification chain as we need to get. Once we have a better understanding of what people
    already do, and what workflows they are looking to use STIX to accomplish, we’ll have a much clearer picture about what objects we need to accomplish that. We may wind up needing a bunch of different objects, we may wind up being able to do it all in
    one. Some of these objects may wind up in STIX 2.1, some may be part of future releases. The point is that until we fully understand what people need and want, we can’t know for sure which it will be.

     
    That being said, we are soliciting use cases .


    What are you and your organizations trying to accomplish in this realm?
    How does your workflow move?
    What types of tools/devices/out-of-band methods do you currently use to accomplish it? Which of those would you like to be able to do via STIX?
     
    You are welcome to send your responses to the mailing list, but we would also like to encourage people to draw them in a tool that we already have going for this very purpose. You can find the drawing board
    here:
    https://sketchboard.me/NABpoAKZidJA# . If you would like to access this (and we highly encourage you to do so), you’ll need to email Jason Keirstead (
    Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com ) with your gmail account and he can give you edit permissions.

     
    I don’t want anyone to get discouraged by this email. As stated, we’re not planning to throw away any of the work we’ve already accomplished, and when all is said and done, we may discover that what we already
    have works perfectly. We just want to make sure we have given every workflow the consideration it deserves and that whatever we come up with will work for as many organizations as possible.

     
    Thanks,
     
    Sarah Kelley
    Senior Cyber Threat Analyst
    Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC)                   
    31 Tech Valley Drive
    East Greenbush, NY 12061
     
    sarah.kelley@cisecurity.org
    518-266-3493
    24x7 Security Operations Center
    SOC@cisecurity.org  - 1-866-787-4722
     

          
                 
    This message and attachments may contain confidential information. If it appears that this message was sent to you by mistake, any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message and attachments
    is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments.


    . . . . .


    This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and/or privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited.
    If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.





  • 2.  Re: [cti-stix] Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO

    Posted 09-01-2017 17:07
    Our main use case for the Event SDO and
    top priority is to be able to export the results of analytics done on raw
    observation data in any of our platforms, to other platforms (including
    other security analytics platforms, threat hunting platforms, IR platforms,
    other TIPs, and ticketing systems) for consumption, and when doing this
    to lose as little fidelity as possible on this analytic result. That would be our #1 use case for this.
    It is somewhat aligned with what Bret has for #3 below, but not exactly.
    - Jason Keirstead STSM, Product Architect, Security Intelligence, IBM Security Systems www.ibm.com/security Without data, all you are is just another person with an opinion - Unknown
    From:      
      Sean Barnum <sean.barnum@FireEye.com> To:      
      Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>,
    Sarah Kelley <Sarah.Kelley@cisecurity.org>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org"
    <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Date:      
      09/01/2017 11:34 AM Subject:    
        Re: [cti-stix]
    Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO Sent by:    
        <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Here would be our list.   Desired Goals for CTI treatment of cyber
    investigation information: Near seamless transition of information
    (observables, identities, locations, etc.) from cyber investigation (digital
    forensics, malware analysis, IR, etc.)  tools to CTI tools Explicit provenance of information (from
    CTI to how it was derived to the investigation where the info came from
    to the information within the investigation to how the information was
    discovered/extracted/derived) for purposes of Confidence Near seamless transition of CTI into cyber
    investigations for contextual correlation and understanding Extract indicators from cyber investigations Sightings referencing the Alert that represents
    the sighting (primarily internal use) Automated COA prescription or even execution
    during Trigger/Triage based on Alerts (these may transition system, sub-organization
    or even organization boundaries) Automated COA prescription or even execution
    during informal and formal investigation phases Derive victim targeting from cross-investigation
    analysis TTP trending from cross-investigation analysis ThreatActor <-> TTP use temporal
    analysis from cross-investigation analysis Incident summary reporting (e.g. US-CERT)       We also had a few comments on the sketchboard
    content: The two flows on the sketchboard don’t
    seem like use cases so much as specific implementation workflows supporting
    use cases. Things like open ticket/close ticket seem too specific for general
    use cases. Many orgs might follow a similar general flow but not specific
    elements of the flows depicted. We suggest the key for STIX to focus on
    are the arrows to and from the green boxes. These represent CTI derived
    from and fed to cyber investigations which are clearly within scope for
    STIX. The light blue boxes and the pink boxes are the domain of cyber investigation
    and out of scope directly for STIX. The questions to ask are: Which elements (and at what granularity)
    out of cyber investigations are relevant for CTI analysis/enrichment? How to structure CTI information fed into
    cyber investigations such that it is as seamless as possible?       Sean Barnum Principal Architect FireEye M: 703.473.8262 E: sean.barnum@fireeye.com   From: <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>
    on behalf of Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com> Date: Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 3:55 PM To: Sarah Kelley <Sarah.Kelley@cisecurity.org>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org"
    <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: [cti-stix] Re: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event
    SDO   My features / goals I would like out of
    this/these objects are:   1) Ability to do automated incident reporting
    to internal/external groups/organizations (think reporting to US-Cert).
    Information should be parsable by a computer and indexable   2) Ability to gather a bunch of post-IR
    reports and look for patterns of Threat Actor / Intrusion Set behavior.
      A nice to have would be:   3) Ability for various SOC tools that do
    IR based ticketing / workflow to share information in STIX format.   Bret From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
    <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Sarah Kelley <Sarah.Kelley@cisecurity.org> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:17:34 AM To: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [EXT] [cti-stix] Way forward with the Event SDO   All,   Given some of the extremely prolific conversations
    that have happened recently (mostly on Slack, but also in email) about
    the Event SDO, we’re going to take a slightly different approach to this
    object.   It seems clear from the conversations that
    not everyone is in agreement on what we’re attempting to model, so trying
    to determine if the draft SDO we have will work poses a challenge. Many
    different stages or types of objects have been proposed, from an alert/event,
    to an investigation, to a collection/grouping, to a post-IR type reporting
    mechanism. That being said, we need to come to some sort of agreement on
    WHAT we’re trying to represent before we can determine if we’re doing
    in the right way.   The co-chairs believe it would be valuable
    to do a reset on this object. We should take a step back from where we
    have been and come to a better understanding of where we need to be. We
    are in no way going to throw out any of the work that has
    already been done. We want to have a focused conversation about what end-to-end
    work flows people are currently using that fall into this realm, starting
    from something as simple as a logline, and going to as far down the analysis
    and notification chain as we need to get. Once we have a better understanding
    of what people already do, and what workflows they are looking to
    use STIX to accomplish, we’ll have a much clearer picture about what objects
    we need to accomplish that. We may wind up needing a bunch of different
    objects, we may wind up being able to do it all in one. Some of these objects
    may wind up in STIX 2.1, some may be part of future releases. The point
    is that until we fully understand what people need and want, we can’t
    know for sure which it will be.   That being said, we
    are soliciting use cases . What are you and your organizations trying
    to accomplish in this realm? How does your workflow move? What types of tools/devices/out-of-band
    methods do you currently use to accomplish it? Which of those would you like to be able
    to do via STIX?   You
    are welcome to send your responses to the mailing list, but we would also
    like to encourage people to draw them in a tool that we already have going
    for this very purpose. You can find the drawing board here: https://sketchboard.me/NABpoAKZidJA# .
    If you would like to access this (and we highly encourage you to do so),
    you’ll need to email Jason Keirstead ( Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com ) with your gmail account and he can give you edit permissions.   I don’t want anyone to get discouraged
    by this email. As stated, we’re not planning to throw away any of the
    work we’ve already accomplished, and when all is said and done, we may
    discover that what we already have works perfectly. We just want to make
    sure we have given every workflow the consideration it deserves and that
    whatever we come up with will work for as many organizations as possible.
      Thanks,   Sarah Kelley Senior Cyber Threat Analyst Multi-State Information
    Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC)          
            31 Tech Valley Drive East Greenbush, NY 12061   sarah.kelley@cisecurity.org 518-266-3493 24x7 Security Operations
    Center SOC@cisecurity.org - 1-866-787-4722                  
      This message and attachments may contain
    confidential information. If it appears that this message was sent to you
    by mistake, any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
    message and attachments is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
    immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. . . . . . This email and any attachments thereto may contain private,
    confidential, and/or privileged material for the sole use of the intended
    recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments
    thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
    recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete
    the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.