Re: [cti] Should name be required

cti message

The way I think of it is that anything that is likely to be referred to by humans in an implementation's user interface should have a name property that would enable the implementation to show it to the human.

The relationship needs a name to show the type of relationship it is to show the user (I would prefer for it to be called relationship name vs relationship label to show that relationships are different from SDOs).

The objects listed in the required section on Brett's email also need a name to differentiate them quickly within the user interface (I'm thinking about a graph model display).

The infrastructure object i think does need a required name, because as a user I would like to know at a glance what infrastructure object i am looking at in a graph model.

The indicator is a tricky one. I am probably leaning towards making it required, as a name is often useful e.g. 'heart bleed large packet detection'.

The observed data I am happy for it to remain without a name. The reason for this is that a name would just repeat the data that's already within the object. I.e. an observable data object with an IP of 1.2.3.4 would likely have a name of 'IP 1.2.3.4', which is something that an implementation can easily generate automatically.

Similarly I'm happy for the sighting relationship to not have a name property as we know that a sighting is specifically a 'sighting' relationship, so a name provides no other help in this case.

On 7/08/2016 5:27 PM, "Jordan, Bret" <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com> wrote:

The following objects have the name property as required:
Attack Pattern
Campaign
Course of Action
Incident
Intrusion Set
Malware
Relationship (see previous email)
Report
Source
Threat Actor
Tool
Victim Target
Vulnerability

The following objects have the name property as optional:
Indicator
Infrastructure

The following objects do NOT have a name property
Observed Data
Sighting

So my question is, do we have the required vs optional state set correctly for all of these objects? Specifically as it pertains to the "name" property.

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."