[MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

Kirillov, Ivan A.
I thought I’d start a separate thread about the status of the Round 1 proposals. Comments close tomorrow, July 28, so please get your feedback in if you haven’t sent it already.
Regards,
Ivan

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

Paul Patrick

Ivan,

 

Is it safe to assume that the alignment with the STIX MalwareTypeEnum-1.0 is postponed for now?

 

 

Paul

 

 

From: Kirillov, Ivan A. [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 7:31 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

 

I thought I’d start a separate thread about the status of the Round 1 proposals. Comments close tomorrow, July 28, so please get your feedback in if you haven’t sent it already.

    • Still being discussed (see latest "MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1" thread).
    • Agreed upon, will be implemented.
    • Based on discussion, will be renamed to “Instance_Object” instead.
    • Based on discussion, this change will be postponed to a later version of MAEC, to ensure consistency with CybOX and STIX.
    • Based on discussion, this change will be postponed to a later version of MAEC, to ensure consistency with STIX.

Regards,

Ivan

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

Kirillov, Ivan A.
Paul,

Yes - unfortunately this will likely have to wait until the next release of STIX. I’ll make sure that this issue is brought up at that time.

Regards,
Ivan

From: Paul Patrick
Reply-To: Paul Patrick
Date: Monday, July 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM
To: maec-discussion-list Malware Attribute Enumeration Discussion
Subject: Re: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

Ivan,

 

Is it safe to assume that the alignment with the STIX MalwareTypeEnum-1.0 is postponed for now?

 

 

Paul

 

 

From: Kirillov, Ivan A. [[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 7:31 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

 

I thought I’d start a separate thread about the status of the Round 1 proposals. Comments close tomorrow, July 28, so please get your feedback in if you haven’t sent it already.

    • Still being discussed (see latest "MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1" thread).
    • Agreed upon, will be implemented.
    • Based on discussion, will be renamed to “Instance_Object” instead.
    • Based on discussion, this change will be postponed to a later version of MAEC, to ensure consistency with CybOX and STIX.
    • Based on discussion, this change will be postponed to a later version of MAEC, to ensure consistency with STIX.

Regards,

Ivan

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [MAEC] MAEC v5.0 Proposals - Round 1 Status

Terry MacDonald
In reply to this post by Kirillov, Ivan A.
All looks good to me.

Cheer
Terry MacDonald

Cheers
Terry MacDonald


On 28 July 2015 at 00:30, Kirillov, Ivan A. <[hidden email]> wrote:
I thought I’d start a separate thread about the status of the Round 1 proposals. Comments close tomorrow, July 28, so please get your feedback in if you haven’t sent it already.
Regards,
Ivan