Re: [cti-stix] Proposal to establish Sightings (#306) and Relationships (#291) as our official issue topics under active consideration for STIX v2.0

["Jordan, Bret" <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com>]

Both cases are valuable.  We currently track both today in our Global Intelligence Network.  Knowing the difference between something that has been seen by 3 people in the industrial controls sector and something that has been seen by 50% of the internet is different.  

Both are valuable.  And I think Jason brings up a good point.  We just need to realize that solving this will be an implementation or deployment level issue, not a spec issue.  Each vendor or product may choose to keep or just increment or do a hodgepodge of both.  

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 Nov 3, 2015, at 10:00, Wunder, John A. <jwunder@mitre.org> wrote:

Is that true in all scenarios? Sure, a lot of commodity indicators will probably have zillions of hits. But what about targeted indicators of APT activity that we want to carefully track?

I feel like we’re designing for this one scenario of a ton of sightings when in practice the more valuable activity might be less volume and more specificity. (Not to say we don’t care about the volume use case, just that it’s not the only one).

John

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail