cacao — archive

Use of Other Standards

From: Jason Keirstead <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 20:07:00 -0000

I think OpenC2 is definitely going to be an option for the command-and-control side of the playbook, but I do not think it can be mandatory. The C&C side has to remain a bit more agnostic to operationalize CACAO in the near term as OpenC2 is not widely adopted yet. We also need to remember that not all C&C is M2M (it is also M2H and H2M) so we have to remain open. - Jason Keirstead Chief Architect - IBM Security Threat Management www.ibm.com/security "Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple, really. Double your rate of failure." - Thomas J. Watson From: duncan sfractal.com <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: 09/17/2019 03:49 PM Subject: [EXTERNAL] [cacao] Use of Other Standards Sent by: <[email protected]> Arnaud proposes we are going to have to spend quite some time on the gap analysis in response to my comment that we should make use of other standards where possible. I disagree. I think we should use them when we know of them and if someone in the TC brings it to the attention of the group. I wouldn t object to people doing gap analysis but I do not think it s a necessary prerequisite and I do not think we should slow down to do such a gap analysis. But if there are existing standards, particularly from OASIS, then I think we should at least allow for their use. Wrt someone in the TC brings it to the attention of the group , I would particularly like to bring up OpenC2 ( https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/openc2/ ) for the command and control of security technology (eg machine-to-machine atomic actions). The OpenC2 TC recently approved 3 Committee Specifications for the OpenC2 language, one particular actuator, and one particular transport mechanism. Clearly more actuators and more transport specs are needed (and are in preparation) but it s also likely the language isn t perfect and will need to add something for CACAO use cases. As TC cochair of the OpenC2 TC, I can commit to working with the CACAO TC to fill in any gaps in the OpenC2 Specification so that hopefully OpenC2 can meet the atomic action needs of CACAO. I am not saying OpenC2 has to be the exclusive C2 mechanism (albeit I wouldn t object to it either) just that it be one of the mechanisms. Duncan Sparrell sFractal Consulting LLC iPhone, iTypo, iApologize I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info / From: Arnaud Taddei <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 12:56 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [EXT] [cacao] Missing requirements Thank you Duncan and sorry I was late hour and I couldn t attend the call 2 weeks ago (am WP3 chairman at ITU-T SG17 and it was WP closing plenary!) I think we are going to have to spend quite some time on the gap analysis on point 3 from Duncan below before we can even give feedback. But that will produce a lot of value in itself De : <[email protected]> au nom de "duncan sfractal.com" <[email protected]> Date : mardi, 17 septembre 2019 Ã 18:09 Ã : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Objet : [EXT] [cacao] Missing requirements This is to document my comments at the meeting. I see 4 requirements missing from the slides that got talked about: Vendor independent interoperability Agile break the CACAO work into phases an get minimum viable product out sooner rather than later, rather than a complete standard taking much more time Use other standards when possible Give feedback to other standards if they are missing something CACAO needs (specifically OpenC2 as the command and control language is new and needs use cases like CACAO to move to it s next phases). Point being (1)use other standard if possible. (2)If it s not possible, see other standard can be changed so it is possible before inventing a new way. I would like to see these included in the meeting notes as brought up as potentially missing from base set of requirements presented. I m not sure process on reaching consensus on the ones presented or on these additions (no objections?). Duncan Sparrell sFractal Consulting LLC iPhone, iTypo, iApologize I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info /