Re: [mile] Security alert reporting - the firstMILE

Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com> Tue, 22 March 2016 17:41 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F142E12D5A2 for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:41:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EnnKPKuEYNSL for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [50.253.254.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EA6712D19A for <mile@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EF446218C; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:41:19 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id dVCNak7-bTv5; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:41:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (unknown [192.168.160.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBB4962186; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:41:16 -0400 (EDT)
To: tony@yaanatech.com, mile@ietf.org
References: <56F166CC.4020103@htt-consult.com> <56F17DC8.8000800@yaanatech.com>
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
Message-ID: <56F183BB.1020306@htt-consult.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:41:15 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56F17DC8.8000800@yaanatech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/dM06mo9pZ-72DWSq0PC1zr5rovA>
Subject: Re: [mile] Security alert reporting - the firstMILE
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange, IODEF extensions and RID exchanges" <mile.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mile/>
List-Post: <mailto:mile@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:41:22 -0000

My reading of ROLLE here, or the limited information I can find googling 
TAXII is that neither address the start of the incident at the 
firewall/IPS/IDS/router.

firstMILE is to get the attack event into the monitoring systems. There 
analytics and/or an admin will determine if mitigation action is needed 
and then start action in RID/ROLLE/TAXII.

Or that is my take on reading existing documents and conversations at 
the past two IETFs.

On 03/22/2016 01:15 PM, Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> There is a lot of puzzlement to go around.
> In trying to track all the parallel universes,
> are you creating an alternative to TAXII here?
> Or ROLLE come to life?
>
> How would you differentiate firstMILE?
>
> -t
>
>
> On 2016-03-22 11:37 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> I have been puzzled by the lack of a standardized security alert 
>> reporting process.  After a few discussions and a lot of thought on 
>> the problem, I have come up with firstMILE:
>
>
>
>