Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects
"Chandrashekhar B" <bchandra@secpod.com> Fri, 17 February 2012 12:12 UTC
Return-Path: <bchandra@secpod.com>
X-Original-To: scap_interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: scap_interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C7921F87E6 for <scap_interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:12:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2DX+48+tRyxu for <scap_interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:12:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpanel23.interactivedns.com (cpanel23.interactivedns.com [184.173.122.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71BDF21F87E7 for <scap_interest@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:12:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [119.82.127.3] (port=1797 helo=hpPC) by cpanel23.interactivedns.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <bchandra@secpod.com>) id 1RyMfc-0005mx-RI; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:42:14 +0530
From: Chandrashekhar B <bchandra@secpod.com>
To: "'Waltermire, David A.'" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>, Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com, lnunez@c3isecurity.com, amontville@tripwire.com
References: <27F65864-3773-40C9-BB6F-8909CB0E94AD@c3isecurity.com> <CB62A117.2C9E8%kent_landfield@mcafee.com> <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930906BF334F@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
In-Reply-To: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930906BF334F@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:42:02 +0530
Organization: SecPod Technologies
Message-ID: <000601cced6d$5f4a3a20$1ddeae60$@secpod.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CCED9B.790F2050"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQI/+cM7jyCiCyFuoTNRH6o3ceD71wDg7nasActt4EWVRYL1EA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cpanel23.interactivedns.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - secpod.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: scap_interest@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects
X-BeenThere: scap_interest@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bchandra@secpod.com
List-Id: "Discussion List for IETFers interested in the Security Content Automation Protocol \(SCAP\)." <scap_interest.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/scap_interest>, <mailto:scap_interest-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/scap_interest>
List-Post: <mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:scap_interest-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scap_interest>, <mailto:scap_interest-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 12:12:21 -0000
I highlighted the interfaces to be standardized in the recent ITSAC, http://scap.nist.gov/events/2011/itsac/presentations/day3/Basavanna%20-%20SC AP%20Content%20Repository.pdf Search interfaces for all SCAP elements need to be standardized along with Client validation as Gunnar noted already. We currently have API's to do the searches, we are considering giving an external interface through WSDL. Chandra. From: scap_interest-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:scap_interest-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Waltermire, David A. Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 12:32 AM To: Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com; lnunez@c3isecurity.com; amontville@tripwire.com Cc: scap_interest@ietf.org Subject: Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects We are continuing to work on this and I am very interested in developing standards in this area. I am currently working on developing an open source prototype that can be used to evaluate standardized approaches to this problem. I haven't published the latest code on this yet, but the original work we started can be found at: http://code.google.com/p/security-automation-content-repository/ The companion presentation to Kent's from March can be found here: http://scap.nist.gov/events/2011/saddsp/presentations/Security_Automation_Co ntent_Repository_Demo.pdf Dave From: scap_interest-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:scap_interest-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 1:46 PM To: lnunez@c3isecurity.com; amontville@tripwire.com Cc: scap_interest@ietf.org Subject: Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects I see the topic of Content Repository interfaces as very important item that really should be worked here. We have been talking about this topic for over two years now as you both are aware. I am including the presentation that was given at SCAP Winter Developer Days last March that may help frame the issues. Kent Landfield Director Content Strategy, Architecture and Standards McAfee | An Intel Company 5000 Headquarters Dr. Plano, Texas 75024 Direct: +1.972.963.7096 Mobile: +1.817.637.8026 Web: www.mcafee.com <http://www.mcafee.com/> From: Luis Nunez <lnunez@c3isecurity.com> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:54:21 -0600 To: Adam Montville <amontville@tripwire.com> Cc: Kent Landfield <kent_landfield@mcafee.com>, "scap_interest@ietf.org" <scap_interest@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Since you mentioned "NVD" also known as the National Vulnerability Database. I think at some point the IETF will be helpful in creating a protocol to communicate with these content repositories. Last I counted was 7 content repositories. In no particular order and I am sure there are more out there. -SecPod -Novell -NVD -IT Security Database -Debian -Altx-soft -ln On Feb 14, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Adam Montville wrote: Fair enough. Just throwing things against the wall as they come to mind. Adam From: kent_landfield <kent_landfield@mcafee.com<mailto:kent_landfield@mcafee.com <mailto:kent_landfield@mcafee.com%3e> >> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:32:38 -0600 To: Adam Montville <amontville@tripwire.com<mailto:amontville@tripwire.com <mailto:amontville@tripwire.com%3e> >>, <scap_interest@ietf.org<mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org <mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org%3e> >> Subject: Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Adam, We have more than enough on our plate with the specification / I-D work. Let's see if we can deal with this in a more appropriate forum. I do not see this as that forum. My 2cents. Thanks. Kent Landfield Director Content Strategy, Architecture and Standards McAfee | An Intel Company 5000 Headquarters Dr. Plano, Texas 75024 Direct: +1.972.963.7096 Mobile: +1.817.637.8026 Web: www.mcafee.com<http://www.mcafee.com/> From: Adam Montville <amontville@tripwire.com<mailto:amontville@tripwire.com <mailto:amontville@tripwire.com%3e> >> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:12:51 -0600 To: "scap_interest@ietf.org<mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org <mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org%3e> >" <scap_interest@ietf.org<mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org <mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org%3e> >> Subject: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects While we're all bantering about on security automation, there's another side to the story. Are there any operational concerns we might address within a WG should one be formed? For example, we have, in the United States, NVD hosting a repository of information. CCE identifiers are moderated and assigned by an operational process. As new enumerations are published and new types of content are conceived, it's easy to imagine the need for some operational standardization. Should we consider standardizing some of these processes, and if so would the WG we seek to establish be the appropriate place for that work? Regards, Adam W. Montville | Security and Compliance Architect Direct: 503 276-7661 Mobile: 360 471-7815 TRIPWIRE | Take CONTROL http://www.tripwire.com _______________________________________________ scap_interest mailing list scap_interest@ietf.org<mailto:scap_interest@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scap_interest _______________________________________________ scap_interest mailing list scap_interest@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scap_interest _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4813 - Release Date: 02/16/12
- [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Adam Montville
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Kent_Landfield
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Adam Montville
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Luis Nunez
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Adam Montville
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Gunnar Engelbach
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Kent_Landfield
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Waltermire, David A.
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Adam Montville
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Waltermire, David A.
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Chandrashekhar B
- Re: [scap_interest] Operational Aspects Jerome Athias