Re: [cti] Top-Level Object Properties

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

Further, doesn't this seem like the inside-out way of doing it?  Shouldn't we figure out what all of the TLOs need and then when we are done, see where the overlap is?  

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 Feb 3, 2016, at 05:53, Wunder, John A. <jwunder@mitre.org> wrote:

All,

There’s a new topic to think about! As discussed at the face to face, each top-level object in STIX and CybOX will inherit from a core set of properties…things like ID, etc. We haven’t quite agreed on what all of those fields are, though.

Take a look at this writeup: https://github.com/STIXProject/specifications/wiki/Active-Issue:-IDable-Construct-Properties. It has a set of fields that we have general agreement on, a list of fields we haven’t really discussed, and then a couple proposals (from Sean and from the twigs team). Feel free to either add your own proposal to that wiki page or discuss on the mailing lists and slack. The key question to consider: what fields should be available on *all* top-level objects?

John

PS: The twigs team added our proposal to the writeup on source references. You can see it on the issue page (https://github.com/STIXProject/specifications/wiki/Active-Issue:-Relating-Source) by scrolling down to Proposal 2. If you want to respond to that one via e-mail, make sure to make a separate thread.

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