Re: [cti] Update from STIX Package renaming Mini-Group

["Jason Keirstead" <Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com>]

Open question - adding an identifier "so that it can be tracked", implies that it SHOULD be tracked.

As an implementer - why do I need to track bundles, as all a bundle is is a whole bunch of content that may or may not be related?

I would argue that we should not encourage the storage or tracking of the bundle structure, and therefore they should not have IDs.

-
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


Allan Thomson ---05/03/2016 12:23:49 PM---As discussed on the call today I would like to propose that we add an identifier attribute for the b

From: Allan Thomson <athomson@lookingglasscyber.com>
To: Mark Davidson <mdavidson@soltra.com>, "cti@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 05/03/2016 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [cti] Update from STIX Package renaming Mini-Group
Sent by: <cti@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

As discussed on the call today I would like to propose that we add an identifier attribute for the bundle so that it can be tracked.

{
  "type": "bundle",
  "spec_version": "stix-2.0”,
  “id”: “bundle--8e2e2d2b-17d4-4cbf-938f-98ee46b3cd3f"
  "indicators": [
    {
      "type": "indicator",
      "id": "indicator--8e2e2d2b-17d4-4cbf-938f-98ee46b3cd3f",
      "created_by_ref": "source--f431f809-377b-45e0-aa1c-6a4751cae5ff",
      "created_time": "2016-04-29T14:09:00.123456Z",
      "revision": 1,
      "modified_time: "2016-04-29T14:09:00.123456Z",
      "object_marking_refs": ["marking-definition--089a6ecb-cc15-43cc-9494-767639779123"],
      "title": "Poison Ivy Malware",
      "description": "This file is part of Poison Ivy",
      "pattern": "file-object.hashes.md5 = '3773a88f65a5e780c8dff9cdc3a056f3'"
    }
  ],
  {
    "type": "marking-definition",
    "id": "marking-definition--089a6ecb-cc15-43cc-9494-767639779123",
    "created_time": "2016-02-19T09:11:01Z",
    "definition_type": "tlp",
    "definition": {
      "tlp": "GREEN"
    }
  }
}


From: "cti@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Mark Davidson <mdavidson@soltra.com>
Date: Friday, April 29, 2016 at 9:56 AM
To: "cti@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [cti] Update from STIX Package renaming Mini-Group

All,

Here is a quick update from the STIX Package name mini-group. The mini group is proposing:

• Renaming STIX-Package to STIX-Bundle
• STIX-bundle is simply a transport container
• STIX-Bundle is a grouping of STIX content that isn’t required to be related (it MIGHT be related, but being in the same bundle doesn’t mean it’s related)
• Removing all TLO Common Properties (with an open question about Data Markings)
  • Removed properties: id, created_by_ref, created_time, revision, modified_time, revoked, revision_comment, confidence, object_markings_refs, granular_markings
• STIX-Bundle will keep the `spec_version` property
• All content in the bundle MUST be the same STIX version (identified by spec_version)

There is an open question about whether Data Markings should be in the STIX-Bundle. Arguments for keeping it are:

• The group seemed to have consensus that Bundle-level markings were desired, but evidence was difficult for the mini-group to find.
• Certain sharing communities would appreciate the simplicity of package marking.
• It makes objects look smaller and is more natural for people who are new to the specs

Arguments for removing it are:

• Data Marking at the bundle level is “two ways of doing things” - on-the-object markings and on-the-bundle markings
• TLO signatures will not be valid when the Bundle-level markings are used

Thank you.
-Mark