I support this, just wanted to point out some material we wrote up for regex in CybOX 2.1:
http://cyboxproject.github.io/documentation/regex-support/. The intent was to identify the subset of PCRE that’s compatible across the most common programming languages and frameworks.
It or something like it could be included as non-normative text or best practices to encourage people to use more compatible regexes.
(Please ignore the note at the bottom about alternative syntaxes, we shouldn’t do that).
John
From:
<cti-cybox@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Jason Keirstead <Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Monday, June 13, 2016 at 8:15 PM
To: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@newcontext.com>
Cc: "cti-cybox@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-cybox@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [cti-cybox] Regex for Patterning
Seconded - we need to move forward.
-
Jason Keirstead
STSM, Product Architect, Security Intelligence, IBM Security Systems
www.ibm.com/security | www.securityintelligence.com
Without data, all you are is just another person with an opinion - Unknown
John-Mark Gurney ---06/13/2016 09:14:02 PM---Hello,
I would like resolve the issue of regex for patterning.
From: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@newcontext.com>
To: cti-cybox@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: 06/13/2016 09:14 PM
Subject: [cti-cybox] Regex for Patterning
Sent by: <cti-cybox@lists.oasis-open.org>
Hello,
I would like resolve the issue of regex for patterning.
Unless anyone voices any objections, we will use PCRE as the regex grammar for the MATCHES operator.
Thanks.
John-Mark