RE: Indicator TLO

I added some comments and suggested text. TL;DR: `decay_rate` (or `aging` or whatever we decide to call it) is important but I don't think it's MVP.

Similarly, for patterning, we should make the non-CybOX patterns MVP and I suspect push the STIX patterning out to the winter release. I feel like that's a huge feature and we've already got coverage from other languages for much (not all) of the proposed functionality.

--
Kyle Maxwell [kmaxwell@verisign.com]

iDefense Senior Analyst

From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org [cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org] on behalf of Jordan, Bret [bret.jordan@bluecoat.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2016 16:24
To: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [cti-stix] Indicator TLO

All,

John and I were reviewing the Indicator TLO today and there are just a few open tasks remaining before it can be moved to the Review phase. Can we ask everyone to help us resolve these last few things? It would be nice to move this from Development to Review by end of week.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F1c05GgYaJFV1Z04B8c_T3vEE-LRQTPExF24LvOQAsk/edit#heading=h.8gcmzx50n1ri

Open Tasks

• What are the values for the Labels field? Is it a controlled vocab or just an array of strings?

• What is the Decay_Rate and is it MVP?

• Do we allow non-cybox patterns (test mechanisms, like yara, openIOC, snort)? And is it MVP?

• Clean up property descriptions

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."

cti-stix message