OASIS Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) TC

Expand all | Collapse all

Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

  • 1.  Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-11-2016 15:18



    Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.


    Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the

    STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document.
    It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider.
    Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have.
    If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.


    For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.








    Report Object

    The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.  

    Inherited Fields

    The Indicator object would inherit the

    CTI Core Properties and the
    CTI Descriptive Properties .

    Proposed Fields







    Property
    Name


    Type


    Description




    intents
    (required)


    array
    of type report-intent-type


    Specifies the intended purposes or uses
    of this Report.




    intents_ext
    (optional)


    array
    of type vocab-ext


    Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses
    of this Report.







    Example
    (using only created_by_ref for brevity)

    {

     "type": "package",

     "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",



     "sources":

       {

         "type": "identity",

         "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",

         "name": "Symantec",

       }

     ],



      "reports": [

       {

         "type": "report",   

         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",

         "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",

         "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship
    between them",

         "intents": ["Threat Report"],

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       }

     ],



     "indicators": [

       {

         "type": "indicator",

         "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "title": "Some indicator",

         "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       }  

     ],



     "campaigns": [

       {

         "type": "campaign",

         "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "title": "Some Campaign",

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       }

     ],



     "relationships": [

       {

         "type": "relationship",

         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",

         "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",

         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       },


       {

         "type": "relationship",   

         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",

         "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",

         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       },

       

       {

         "type": "relationship",

         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",

         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",

         "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",

         "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       },

       

       {

         "type": "relationship",

         "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",

         "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",

         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",

         "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",

         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",

         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"

       },

     ]

    }











  • 2.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 03:27
    For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit special .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.   {   type : report ,   id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,   created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,   title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,   descriptions : [     A simple report   ],   intents : [ Threat Report ],   created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,   reported_objects : [     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3 ,     campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523     ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4 ,     threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5   ]   } 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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote: Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text. Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others. For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below. Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the CTI Core Properties and the CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields Property Name Type Description intents (required) array of type report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext (optional) array of type vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report. Example (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {   type : package ,   id : package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982 ,   sources :    {       type : identity ,       id : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,       name : Symantec ,    }  ],    reports : [    {       type : report ,          id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,       title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,       description : A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them ,       intents : [ Threat Report ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   indicators : [    {       type : indicator ,       id : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some indicator ,       indicator_types : [ IP Watchlist ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }    ],   campaigns : [    {       type : campaign ,       id : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   relationships : [    {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },    {       type : relationship ,          id : relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       to : campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Related Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },  ] } Attachment: signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


  • 3.  RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 03:47
    I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206 terry@soltra.com     From: cti@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To: Barnum, Sean D. <sbarnum@mitre.org>; cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   "type": "report",   "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",   "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",   "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",   "descriptions": [     "A simple report"   ],   "intents": ["Threat Report"],   "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",   "reported_objects": [     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",     "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"     "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",     "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the CTI Core Properties and the CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents (required) array of type report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext (optional) array of type vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report.   Example (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {  "type": "package",  "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",  "sources":    {      "type": "identity",      "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",      "name": "Symantec",    }  ],   "reports": [    {      "type": "report",         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",      "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",      "intents": ["Threat Report"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "indicators": [    {      "type": "indicator",      "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some indicator",      "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }    ],  "campaigns": [    {      "type": "campaign",      "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "relationships": [    {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },      {      "type": "relationship",         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",      "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },  ] }  


  • 4.  RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 14:17
    We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).   Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing it's contents, we should. Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk: (856)983-0001 Cell: (609)841-5104 Email: pmaroney@specere.org _____________________________ From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >, < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206 terry@soltra.com     From: cti@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To: Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >; cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   "type": "report",   "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",   "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",   "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",   "descriptions": [     "A simple report"   ],   "intents": ["Threat Report"],   "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",   "reported_objects": [     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",     "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"     "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",     "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the CTI Core Properties and the CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents (required) array of type report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext (optional) array of type vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report.   Example (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {  "type": "package",  "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",  "sources":    {      "type": "identity",      "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",      "name": "Symantec",    }  ],   "reports": [    {      "type": "report",         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",      "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",      "intents": ["Threat Report"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "indicators": [    {      "type": "indicator",      "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some indicator",      "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }    ],  "campaigns": [    {      "type": "campaign",      "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "relationships": [    {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },      {      "type": "relationship",         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",      "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },  ] }  


  • 5.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 14:26




    Pat, what would you use this capability for? Providing a PDF version of the report, or something else? Is that something that the “Reference” object might do?


    Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and
    relate objects with some confidence assertion.


    OTOH, the idref-based approach is a bit simpler conceptually and seems to better align with where the industry is now: reports are issued once, have defined producers, and objects are either in (mentioned) or out (not mentioned).


    John








    From: < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org >
    Date: Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:17 AM
    To: " cti@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >, Sean Barnum < sbarnum@mitre.org >,
    Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >, "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
    Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)






    We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).  


    Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing
    it's contents, we should.

    Patrick Maroney
    President
    Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc.
    Desk:
    (856)983-0001
    Cell:
    (609)841-5104
    Email:
    pmaroney@specere.org



    _____________________________
    From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >
    Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM
    Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)
    To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >,
    < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >






    I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are
    still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong
    in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.

     
    Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent
    relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is
    something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.
     
    Cheers
     

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

     


    From:
    cti@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]
    On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret
    Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM
    To: Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;

    cti@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)


     
    For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .
     Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.  

     


    {
      "type": "report",
      "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",
      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",
      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",

      "descriptions": [


        "A simple report"

      ],
      "intents": ["Threat Report"],
      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


      "reported_objects": [


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",


        "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"


        "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",


        "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"


      ]  
    }








     


    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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:

     



    Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative
    text.


     


    Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the

    STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document.


    It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider.


    Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have.


    If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.


     


    For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.


     


     


     



    Report Object

    The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.  


    Inherited Fields

    The Indicator object would inherit the

    CTI Core Properties and the
    CTI Descriptive Properties .


    Proposed Fields
     






    Property Name




    Type




    Description






    intents (required)




    array of type
    report-intent-type




    Specifies the intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






    intents_ext
    (optional)




    array of type
    vocab-ext




    Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






     

    Example
    (using only created_by_ref for brevity)

    {


     "type": "package",


     "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",


     "sources":


       {


         "type": "identity",


         "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


         "name": "Symantec",


       }


     ],


      "reports": [


       {


         "type": "report",   


         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",


         "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",


         "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",


         "intents": ["Threat Report"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "indicators": [


       {


         "type": "indicator",


         "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some indicator",


         "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }  


     ],


     "campaigns": [


       {


         "type": "campaign",


         "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "relationships": [


       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

     

       {


         "type": "relationship",   


         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",


         "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },


     ]


    }











     














  • 6.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 14:34
    Although including things like PDF Reports, Legacy STIX files, etc. would be examples, the way I would describe  the "ask" is the ability to pass an encrypted BLOB payload that could contain anything I want/need to pass in my CTI Interexchange that I can't pass/access by reference (i.e. URI). Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk: (856)983-0001 Cell: (609)841-5104 Email: pmaroney@specere.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 6:26 AM -0800, "Wunder, John A." < jwunder@mitre.org > wrote: Pat, what would you use this capability for? Providing a PDF version of the report, or something else? Is that something that the “Reference” object might do? Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and relate objects with some confidence assertion. OTOH, the idref-based approach is a bit simpler conceptually and seems to better align with where the industry is now: reports are issued once, have defined producers, and objects are either in (mentioned) or out (not mentioned). John From: < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org > Date: Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:17 AM To: " cti@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >, Sean Barnum < sbarnum@mitre.org >, Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >, "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com > Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).   Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing it's contents, we should. Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk: (856)983-0001 Cell: (609)841-5104 Email: pmaroney@specere.org _____________________________ From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >, < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206 terry@soltra.com     From: cti@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To: Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >; cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   "type": "report",   "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",   "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",   "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",   "descriptions": [     "A simple report"   ],   "intents": ["Threat Report"],   "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",   "reported_objects": [     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",     "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",     "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"     "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",     "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the CTI Core Properties and the CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents (required) array of type report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext (optional) array of type vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report.   Example (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {  "type": "package",  "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",  "sources":    {      "type": "identity",      "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",      "name": "Symantec",    }  ],   "reports": [    {      "type": "report",         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",      "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",      "intents": ["Threat Report"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "indicators": [    {      "type": "indicator",      "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some indicator",      "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }    ],  "campaigns": [    {      "type": "campaign",      "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "title": "Some Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    }  ],  "relationships": [    {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },      {      "type": "relationship",         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",      "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },        {      "type": "relationship",      "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",      "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",      "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",      "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",      "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"    },  ] }  


  • 7.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 18:04
    Is this really a primary use case for STIX?  Or are we trying to shoe-horn in something that is not part of our core objectives?   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 Feb 15, 2016, at 07:34, Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org > wrote: Although including things like PDF Reports, Legacy STIX files, etc. would be examples, the way I would describe  the ask is the ability to pass an encrypted BLOB payload that could contain anything I want/need to pass in my CTI Interexchange that I can't pass/access by reference (i.e. URI). Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk:   (856)983-0001 Cell:   (609)841-5104 Email:   pmaroney@specere.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 6:26 AM -0800, Wunder, John A.   < jwunder@mitre.org >   wrote: Pat, what would you use this capability for? Providing a PDF version of the report, or something else? Is that something that the “Reference” object might do? Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and relate objects with some confidence assertion. OTOH, the idref-based approach is a bit simpler conceptually and seems to better align with where the industry is now: reports are issued once, have defined producers, and objects are either in (mentioned) or out (not mentioned). John From:   < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org > Date:   Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:17 AM To:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >, Sean Barnum < sbarnum@mitre.org >, Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >, Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com > Subject:   RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).   Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing it's contents, we should. Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk:   (856)983-0001 Cell:   (609)841-5104 Email:   pmaroney@specere.org _____________________________ From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >, < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206     terry@soltra.com     From:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org   [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]   On Behalf Of   Jordan, Bret Sent:   Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To:   Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;   cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject:   Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit special .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   type : report ,   id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,   created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,   title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,   descriptions : [     A simple report   ],   intents : [ Threat Report ],   created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,   reported_objects : [     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3 ,     campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523     ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4 ,     threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the   STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft   document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the   CTI Core Properties   and the   CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents   (required) array   of type   report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext   (optional) array   of type   vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report.   Example   (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {   type : package ,   id : package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982 ,   sources :    {       type : identity ,       id : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,       name : Symantec ,    }  ],    reports : [    {       type : report ,          id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,       title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,       description : A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them ,       intents : [ Threat Report ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   indicators : [    {       type : indicator ,       id : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some indicator ,       indicator_types : [ IP Watchlist ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }    ],   campaigns : [    {       type : campaign ,       id : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   relationships : [    {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },      {       type : relationship ,          id : relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       to : campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Related Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },  ] } Attachment: signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


  • 8.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-16-2016 14:42
    I would say that it would be a useful extension of STIX to be able to handle passing blobs (regardless of what the blob contains). Many other protocols/schema allow this capability. allan Thomson LookingGlass CTO On Feb 15, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@BLUECOAT.COM > wrote: Is this really a primary use case for STIX?  Or are we trying to shoe-horn in something that is not part of our core objectives?   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 Feb 15, 2016, at 07:34, Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org > wrote: Although including things like PDF Reports, Legacy STIX files, etc. would be examples, the way I would describe  the ask is the ability to pass an encrypted BLOB payload that could contain anything I want/need to pass in my CTI Interexchange that I can't pass/access by reference (i.e. URI). Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk:   (856)983-0001 Cell:   (609)841-5104 Email:   pmaroney@specere.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 6:26 AM -0800, Wunder, John A.   < jwunder@mitre.org >   wrote: Pat, what would you use this capability for? Providing a PDF version of the report, or something else? Is that something that the “Reference” object might do? Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and relate objects with some confidence assertion. OTOH, the idref-based approach is a bit simpler conceptually and seems to better align with where the industry is now: reports are issued once, have defined producers, and objects are either in (mentioned) or out (not mentioned). John From:   < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org > Date:   Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:17 AM To:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >, Sean Barnum < sbarnum@mitre.org >, Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >, Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com > Subject:   RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).   Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing it's contents, we should. Patrick Maroney President Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. Desk:   (856)983-0001 Cell:   (609)841-5104 Email:   pmaroney@specere.org _____________________________ From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday) To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >, < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206     terry@soltra.com     From:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org   [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]   On Behalf Of   Jordan, Bret Sent:   Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To:   Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;   cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject:   Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit special .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   type : report ,   id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,   created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,   title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,   descriptions : [     A simple report   ],   intents : [ Threat Report ],   created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,   reported_objects : [     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3 ,     campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523     ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4 ,     threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the   STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft   document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the   CTI Core Properties   and the   CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents   (required) array   of type   report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses of this Report. intents_ext   (optional) array   of type   vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of this Report.   Example   (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {   type : package ,   id : package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982 ,   sources :    {       type : identity ,       id : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,       name : Symantec ,    }  ],    reports : [    {       type : report ,          id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,       title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,       description : A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them ,       intents : [ Threat Report ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   indicators : [    {       type : indicator ,       id : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some indicator ,       indicator_types : [ IP Watchlist ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }    ],   campaigns : [    {       type : campaign ,       id : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   relationships : [    {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },      {       type : relationship ,          id : relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       to : campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Related Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },  ] } Attachment: signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


  • 9.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-16-2016 16:10
    On 16.02.2016 06:42:23, Allan Thomson wrote: > I would say that it would be a useful extension of STIX to be able > to handle passing blobs (regardless of what the blob contains). > Ivan and I *just* had a long conversation about this in the context of CybOX. The existing Artifact object in CybOX 2.1 allows this in a CybOX context (although as far as I can tell, no-one is actually using it so far.) Time permitting, I'll take a stab this week at defining a "Blob" object in the CTI Commons spec (with corresponding relationship types), based roughly on the existing CybOX 2.1 Artifact object. This would support passing blobs of arbitrary stuff at both the STIX and CybOX levels. Cool? -- Cheers, Trey -- Trey Darley Senior Security Engineer 4DAA 0A88 34BC 27C9 FD2B A97E D3C6 5C74 0FB7 E430 Soltra An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company www.soltra.com -- "It is always possible to aglutenate multiple separate problems into a single complex interdependent solution. In most cases this is a bad idea." --RFC 1925 Attachment: signature.asc Description: PGP signature


  • 10.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 18:03
    Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and relate objects with some confidence assertion. IMO, if someone wants to add stuff or take stuff away from my report, they should be required to generate their OWN version of the report. They should not be allowed to add or remove content from MY report.  That report is mine, and my view.  You can disagree with my view, but it is still my REPORT.   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.   Attachment: signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


  • 11.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-16-2016 15:06





    I would agree with John. This sounds like a particular use case for the Reference object. It sounds like what we are talking about is some sort of reference resource.
    We would need to think through exactly how the Reference object would capture and convey this information.


    BTW, while I think that the Report object is intended to be able to capture a STIX version of what is currently done via “report” documents, I believe that the impetus behind the Report object was not limited to this obvious corollary. I believe it was
    also intended to convey shared context of content which exists only within a TIP and not as a separate document somewhere. We need to be careful and recognize we aren’t just talking about capturing unstructured “report” documents into structured form.


    sean









    From: < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of John Wunder < jwunder@mitre.org >
    Date: Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:26 AM
    To: " cti@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)






    Pat, what would you use this capability for? Providing a PDF version of the report, or something else? Is that something that the “Reference” object might do?


    Back to Bret’s original comment, I can see both approaches for the Report object working. The relationship-based approach is more powerful and allows for a lot of flexibility for a report to evolve over time, have ad-hoc producers relating things, and
    relate objects with some confidence assertion.


    OTOH, the idref-based approach is a bit simpler conceptually and seems to better align with where the industry is now: reports are issued once, have defined producers, and objects are either in (mentioned) or out (not mentioned).


    John








    From: < cti@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Patrick Maroney < Pmaroney@Specere.org >
    Date: Monday, February 15, 2016 at 9:17 AM
    To: " cti@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >, Sean Barnum < sbarnum@mitre.org >,
    Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >, "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
    Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)






    We should also ensure that the Report construct can be used to pass other types of external objects by reference (providing  metadata such as IANA Media Types, Media subtypes, URI?).  


    Not sure where we've ended up on the concept of passing a BLOB in a STIX package now that we've stepped away from embedded objects.  So if we have not provided for inclusion of a standardized way to pass the content of a binary object with a header describing
    it's contents, we should.

    Patrick Maroney
    President
    Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc.
    Desk:
    (856)983-0001
    Cell:
    (609)841-5104
    Email:
    pmaroney@specere.org



    _____________________________
    From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >
    Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:47 PM
    Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)
    To: Jordan, Bret < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >,
    < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >






    I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are
    still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong
    in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.

     
    Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent
    relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is
    something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.
     
    Cheers
     

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

     


    From:
    cti@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]
    On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret
    Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM
    To: Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;

    cti@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)


     
    For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .
     Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.  

     


    {
      "type": "report",
      "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",
      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",
      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",

      "descriptions": [


        "A simple report"

      ],
      "intents": ["Threat Report"],
      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


      "reported_objects": [


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",


        "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"


        "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",


        "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"


      ]  
    }








     


    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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:

     



    Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative
    text.


     


    Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the

    STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document.


    It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider.


    Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have.


    If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.


     


    For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.


     


     


     



    Report Object

    The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.  


    Inherited Fields

    The Indicator object would inherit the

    CTI Core Properties and the
    CTI Descriptive Properties .


    Proposed Fields
     






    Property Name




    Type




    Description






    intents (required)




    array of type
    report-intent-type




    Specifies the intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






    intents_ext
    (optional)




    array of type
    vocab-ext




    Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






     

    Example
    (using only created_by_ref for brevity)

    {


     "type": "package",


     "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",


     "sources":


       {


         "type": "identity",


         "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


         "name": "Symantec",


       }


     ],


      "reports": [


       {


         "type": "report",   


         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",


         "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",


         "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",


         "intents": ["Threat Report"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "indicators": [


       {


         "type": "indicator",


         "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some indicator",


         "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }  


     ],


     "campaigns": [


       {


         "type": "campaign",


         "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "relationships": [


       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

     

       {


         "type": "relationship",   


         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",


         "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },


     ]


    }











     
















  • 12.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-15-2016 18:01
    The thing I do NOT like about what you have proposed is the idea that someone else can update my report.  A report that I produce should be, IMHO, viewed as a PDF equivalent of something.  I do not think I would want to allow people to add extra content to my report or heaven forbid remove something from my report.   Without this, a report is really meaningless in our new world order of relationships.  There would then be NO difference between a report and a package.  It is my understanding that the reason Soltra proposed the Report object to begin with is to give context around a grouping of objects.   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 Feb 14, 2016, at 20:47, Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > wrote: I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.   Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.   Cheers   Terry MacDonald Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company +61 (407) 203 206   terry@soltra.com     From:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org   [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]   On Behalf Of   Jordan, Bret Sent:   Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM To:   Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;   cti@lists.oasis-open.org Subject:   Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)   For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit special .  Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.     {   type : report ,   id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,   created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,   title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,   descriptions : [     A simple report   ],   intents : [ Threat Report ],   created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,   reported_objects : [     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,     indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3 ,     campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523     ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4 ,     threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5   ]   }   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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:   Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.   Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the   STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft   document. It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider. Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have. If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.   For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.       Report Object The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.   Inherited Fields The Indicator object would inherit the   CTI Core Properties   and the   CTI Descriptive Properties . Proposed Fields   Property Name Type Description intents   (required) array   of type   report-intent-type Specifies the intended purposes or uses   of this Report. intents_ext   (optional) array   of type   vocab-ext Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses   of this Report.   Example   (using only created_by_ref for brevity) {   type : package ,   id : package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982 ,   sources :    {       type : identity ,       id : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283 ,       name : Symantec ,    }  ],    reports : [    {       type : report ,          id : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00 ,       title : The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group ,       description : A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them ,       intents : [ Threat Report ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   indicators : [    {       type : indicator ,       id : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some indicator ,       indicator_types : [ IP Watchlist ],       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }    ],   campaigns : [    {       type : campaign ,       id : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       title : Some Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    }  ],   relationships : [    {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },      {       type : relationship ,          id : relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       to : campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2 ,       relationship_nature : Related Campaign ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },        {       type : relationship ,       id : relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9 ,       created_at : 2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00 ,       from : report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd ,       to : relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a ,       relationship_nature : Report Contains ,       created_by_ref : identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283    },  ] } Attachment: signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


  • 13.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-16-2016 15:01





    I don’t think having this done with relationships changes your report at all.
    It simply empowers the collaborative ebb and flow of information/understanding evolution between parties.
    If you produced the Report then the “official” version of the Report is the actual Report object and the set of relationships that YOU have asserted for it.
    The richer version of that report is your actual Report object, your set of relationships for it AND other relationships that have been asserted by others that any consumer including you can take into consideration.
    Think about how the APT1 report came out and then 20-30 other groups started adding in their bits and pieces to the puzzle. Unfortunately, this was all done via blog posts and separate documents with nothing to tie them together other than well thought
    out Google searches. With the Report object done as proposed here we could have explicit and clear evolution of understanding on the intent/topic of the report.


    >It is my understanding that the reason Soltra proposed the Report object to begin with is to give context around a grouping of objects.  


    I think this is still very much true. A Report specifies a context for correlating some group of STIX objects while a Package simply contains objects. The difference between how we originally structured Report and how it is proposed now is that we have
    now STIX-wide broken out assertions of relationships between objects to separate constructs that are more flexible and given the power that Terry describes. This has not changed the intended purpose of the Report object it has simply changed the assertion
    of shared context from a file folder with a title page to just the title page that can be asserted as relevant to content anywhere and does not require it to be shoved only within the file folder.


    sean









    From: "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >
    Date: Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:01 PM
    To: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >
    Cc: "Barnum, Sean D." < sbarnum@mitre.org >, " cti@lists.oasis-open.org " < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)





    The thing I do NOT like about what you have proposed is the idea that someone else can update my report.  A report that I produce should be, IMHO, viewed as a PDF equivalent of something.  I do not think I would want to allow people to add extra content to
    my report or heaven forbid remove something from my report.  


    Without this, a report is really meaningless in our new world order of relationships.  There would then be NO difference between a report and a package.  It is my understanding that the reason Soltra proposed the Report object to begin with is
    to give context around a grouping of objects.  












    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 Feb 14, 2016, at 20:47, Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com > wrote:




    I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are still someone’s assertion
    of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong in the report. This will allow
    the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.

     

    Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent relationship to link that
    report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is something they missed) then
    they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.

     

    Cheers

     


    Terry MacDonald

    Senior STIX Subject Matter Expert

    SOLTRA   An FS-ISAC and DTCC Company

    +61 (407) 203 206   terry@soltra.com

     


     



    From:   cti@lists.oasis-open.org   [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]   On
    Behalf Of   Jordan, Bret
    Sent:   Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM
    To:   Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;   cti@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject:   Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)



     

    For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .  Meaning that
    you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.  


     



    {
      "type": "report",
      "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",
      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",
      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",


      "descriptions": [



        "A simple report"


      ],
      "intents": ["Threat Report"],
      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",



      "reported_objects": [



        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",



        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",



        "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"



        "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",



        "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"



      ]  
    }









     



    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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:


     




    Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative text.



     



    Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the   STIX
    2.0 Specification Pre-draft   document.



    It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider.



    Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have.



    If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.



     



    For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.



     



     



     



    Report Object


    The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.  


    Inherited Fields


    The Indicator object would inherit the   CTI
    Core Properties   and the   CTI
    Descriptive Properties .


    Proposed Fields

     







    Property Name





    Type





    Description







    intents   (required)





    array   of
    type   report-intent-type





    Specifies the intended purposes or uses   of
    this Report.







    intents_ext   (optional)





    array   of
    type   vocab-ext





    Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses   of
    this Report.







     

    Example   (using
    only created_by_ref for brevity)


    {



     "type": "package",



     "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",



     "sources":



       {



         "type": "identity",



         "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",



         "name": "Symantec",



       }



     ],



      "reports": [



       {



         "type": "report",   



         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",



         "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",



         "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign
    and a relationship between them",



         "intents": ["Threat Report"],



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       }



     ],



     "indicators": [



       {



         "type": "indicator",



         "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "title": "Some indicator",



         "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       }  



     ],



     "campaigns": [



       {



         "type": "campaign",



         "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "title": "Some Campaign",



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       }



     ],



     "relationships": [



       {



         "type": "relationship",



         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",



         "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",



         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       },


     


       {



         "type": "relationship",   



         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",



         "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",



         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       },


       


       {



         "type": "relationship",



         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",



         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",



         "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",



         "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       },


       


       {



         "type": "relationship",



         "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",



         "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",



         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",



         "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",



         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",



         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"



       },



     ]



    }






















  • 14.  Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)

    Posted 02-16-2016 14:48





    I agree with Terry here.


    sean









    From: Terry MacDonald < terry@soltra.com >
    Date: Sunday, February 14, 2016 at 10:47 PM
    To: "Jordan, Bret" < bret.jordan@bluecoat.com >, "Barnum, Sean D." < sbarnum@mitre.org >, " cti@lists.oasis-open.org "
    < cti@lists.oasis-open.org >
    Subject: RE: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)








    I’d still prefer in this case for the report to use the relationship objects. The reason is that when reports are generated, they are
    still someone’s assertion of the truth. Having independent relationship objects allows third parties to generate opinion objects that refer to the relationships – such that the third parties can comment on the individual items that they don’t think belong
    in the report. This will allow the report producer to independently remove the bits of the report that they don’t want to have in there.

     
    Conversely, if there is an object that a thirdparty believes that the report producer missed, they can create their own independent
    relationship to link that report to the object. It is of course up to the consumers if they accept that independent relationship (or maybe its marked internally as different). If the original report producer accepts that content as being correct (i.e. it is
    something they missed) then they can issue their own relationship connecting their report to the object – effectively giving it the ‘official’ stamp of approval.
     
    Cheers
     

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

     


    From:
    cti@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:cti@lists.oasis-open.org ]
    On Behalf Of Jordan, Bret
    Sent: Monday, 15 February 2016 2:27 PM
    To: Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org >;
    cti@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: Re: [cti] Proposed normative text available for Report object refactoring - (Goal: Reach official consensus by Monday)


     
    For reports, do we really want to create a report object with nothing in it and then have a series of relationships where so much of the meta-data is replicated?  I had kind of envisioned the Report object being a bit " special" .
     Meaning that you would be able to include a series of references to objects that were all PART of the report.  The report object is just a special object and differs from other objects in STIX and the package.  

     


    {
      "type": "report",
      "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",
      "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",
      "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",

      "descriptions": [


        "A simple report"

      ],
      "intents": ["Threat Report"],
      "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


      "reported_objects": [


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


        "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d3",


        "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b523"


        "ttp--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d4",


        "threat-actor--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d5"


      ]  
    }








     


    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 Feb 11, 2016, at 08:17, Barnum, Sean D. < sbarnum@mitre.org > wrote:

     



    Refactoring of the Report object based on our breaking out of relationships is one of the issues that we seem to have general consensus on but have not yet agreed to normative
    text.


     


    Proposed normative text is now available for your review in the

    STIX 2.0 Specification Pre-draft document.


    It is fairly straightforward and should not take long to consider.


    Please review the normative text and add comments to the document for any concerns, questions or ideas you may have.


    If we do not see any significant concerns/objections to the normative text by Monday we will consider this issues to have officially achieved consensus and move on to others.


     


    For the quick convenience of anyone having difficulty accessing the live specification pre-draft document the relevant text is included below.


     


     


     



    Report Object

    The Report Object is a mechanism for relating a collection of STIX TLOs together according to some shared context.  


    Inherited Fields

    The Indicator object would inherit the

    CTI Core Properties and the
    CTI Descriptive Properties .


    Proposed Fields
     






    Property Name




    Type




    Description






    intents (required)




    array of type
    report-intent-type




    Specifies the intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






    intents_ext
    (optional)




    array of type
    vocab-ext




    Specifies alternate intended purposes or uses of
    this Report.






     

    Example
    (using only created_by_ref for brevity)

    {


     "type": "package",


     "id": "package--44af6c39-c09b-49c5-9de2-394224b04982",


     "sources":


       {


         "type": "identity",


         "id": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283",


         "name": "Symantec",


       }


     ],


      "reports": [


       {


         "type": "report",   


         "id": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:11.000000+00:00",


         "title": "The Black Vine Cyberespionage Group",


         "description": "A simple report with an indicator, campaign and a relationship between them",


         "intents": ["Threat Report"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "indicators": [


       {


         "type": "indicator",


         "id": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some indicator",


         "indicator_types": ["IP Watchlist"],


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }  


     ],


     "campaigns": [


       {


         "type": "campaign",


         "id": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "title": "Some Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       }


     ],


     "relationships": [


       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

     

       {


         "type": "relationship",   


         "id": "relationship--72f666b6-f1db-4b2c-82e3-71ab49a84be1",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "campaign--83422c77-904c-4dc1-aff5-5c38f3a2c55c",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "created_at": "2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "indicator--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "to": "campaign--26ffb872-1dd9-446e-b6f5-d58527e5b5d2",


         "relationship_nature": "Related Campaign",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },

       

       {


         "type": "relationship",


         "id": "relationship--a05d8c6a-ccea-4a0a-a8e0-68dfe85fbfa9",


         "created_at":"2015-12-21T19:59:17.000000+00:00",


         "from": "report--84e4d88f-44ea-4bcd-bbf3-b2c1c320bcbd",


         "to": "relationship--f82356ae-fe6c-437c-9c24-6b64314ae68a",


         "relationship_nature": "Report Contains",


         "created_by_ref": "identity--a463ffb3-1bd9-4d94-b02d-74e4f1658283"


       },


     ]


    }