[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] _ref field suffix
Yep, though to clarify, we’ve just been using the exact field name “id” for the TLOs unique ID. So an indicator’s ID field is called “id” and an observations ID field is called “id”.
I’m comfortable with the term reference just because I think it’s a fairly common term for the use of an identifier that points to something else. If we want to call both usages “identifier” that’s fine, as long as we’re clear when we’re using it to identify
something vs. when we’re using it to point to an identifier for something else.
From: Allan Thomson <athomson@lookingglasscyber.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 1:46 PM To: "Wunder, John A." <jwunder@mitre.org>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: Re: [cti-stix] _ref field suffix After consideration I think I understand your point better.
If an attribute is the object’s identifier then the field will be call <X>_id, correct? In that case its the identifier of the specific object.
Whereas <X>_ref is a reference to a different object. In which case the identifier is a different object.
I see the distinction you are making.
My main concern was around the term ‘reference’ being called out when its really just an identifier.
There is no “type” in STIX for reference, correct? Its just an identifier. So why explicitly callout Reference?
allan
From: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Allan Thomson <athomson@lookingglasscyber.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 10:41 AM To: "Wunder, John" <jwunder@mitre.org>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: Re: [cti-stix] _ref field suffix John – I agree that a _ref is a reference to another object but so is an Id field. That’s my point. Both fields are references to an object that is identified by an identifier.
allan
From: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of "Wunder, John" <jwunder@mitre.org>
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 10:37 AM To: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: Re: [cti-stix] _ref field suffix (Renamed subject line to track this thread)
I’m against dropping it. I have a practical reason and a philosophical reason:
John
From: "Jordan, Bret" <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 1:29 PM To: "Wunder, John A." <jwunder@mitre.org> Cc: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: Re: [cti-stix] STIX, Topics to Review, 10 May
Based on the conversation today on the working call, I would be okay with dropping the "_ref" from the ID reference property names, since that is the only place where we add a field type to a property name.
Where do people stand on this?
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."
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]