chg: [b.2] Reduced some wall of text and added pictures

changes-actionable
mokaddem 2019-11-12 18:23:40 +01:00
parent 8577dcf8db
commit 7e60b1ed82
6 changed files with 37 additions and 26 deletions

View File

@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Initial workflow}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{workflow_initial.png}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{workflow_initial2.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
@ -83,11 +83,11 @@
\begin{itemize}
\item There were separate factors that made our data-sets less and less useful for detection/defense in general
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Growth of our communities} different organisations with different objectives often lead to different quality data or data with a different focus
\item More advanced protective methods relied on knowing {\bf why certain information is of interest}, rather than just being fed raw data
\item {\bf False positive management} became more pivotal - and more importantly more diverse based on different use-cases
\item {\bf TTPs and aggregate information} in general were much more important to threat intel analysts and those dealing with risk assessment than raw data
\item Due to the increased data volumes, depending on the tools being fed there was a growing need to be able to prioritise
\item Growth of our communities
\item Distinguish between information of interest and raw data
\item False positive management
\item TTPs and aggregate information may be prevalent compared to raw data (risk assessment)
\item Increased data volumes leads to be able to prioritise
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
@ -124,7 +124,7 @@
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.24]{creativity.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{creativity.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
@ -134,30 +134,37 @@
\item We ended up with a mixed approach, currently implemented by the MISP-taxonomy system
\begin{itemize}
\item Taxonomies are {\bf vocabularies} of known tags
\item Tags would be in a {\bf triple tag format} (namespace:predicate=''value'')
\item Each taxonomy tag could have an optional normalised {\bf numerical value} (0-100)
\item Create your own taxonomies, recipients should be able to use data you tag with them
\item Tags would be in a {\bf triple tag format}
\begin{itemize}
\item[] \texttt{namespace:predicate=''value''}
\end{itemize}
\item Create your own taxonomies, recipients should be able to use data you tag with them without knowing it at the first place
\item Avoid any coding, stick to {\bf JSON}
\end{itemize}
\item Massive success, approaching 100 taxonomies
\item Organisations can solve their own issues without having to rely on us
\end{itemize}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{taxonomy-workflow.png}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{We were still missing something...}
\begin{itemize}
\begin{itemize}
\item Taxonomy tags were in some cases non self-explanatory
\item Example: universal understanding of tlp:green vs APT 28
\item For the latter, a single string was ill-suited
\item So we needed something new in addition to taxonomies - Galaxies
\item So we needed something new in addition to taxonomies - \textbf{Galaxies}
\begin{itemize}
\item Community driven knowledge-base libraries used as tags
\item Including descriptions, links, synonyms, meta information, etc.
\item Goal was to keep it simple and make it reusable
\item Internally it works the exact same way as taxonomies
\item Community driven \textbf{knowledge-base libraries used as tags}
\item Including descriptions, links, synonyms, meta information, etc.
\item Goal was to keep it \textbf{simple and make it reusable}
\item Internally it works the exact same way as taxonomies (stick to \textbf{JSON})
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\begin{center}
\hspace{10em}
\includegraphics[scale=0.30]{galaxy-ransomware.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
@ -176,13 +183,17 @@
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Parallel to the contextualisation efforts: False positive handling}
\begin{itemize}
\item One of the most common criticisms: {\bf low quality / false positive} prone information being shared
\item Lead to {\bf alert-fatigue}, organisations not using the data in any automated fashion
\item Could you kick organisation xy out of the community?
\item False positives are often blatantly obvious - {\bf can't we encode this knowledge}?
\item Low quality / false positive prone information being shared
\item Lead to {\bf alert-fatigue}
\item Exclude organisation xy out of the community?
\item False positives are often obvious - {\bf can be encoded}
\item {\bf Warninglist system}\footnote{\url{https://github.com/MISP/misp-warninglists}} aims to do that
\item Predefined lists of well-known indicators which are often false-positives like RFC1918 networks, public DNS resolver are included by default
\item Lists of well-known indicators which are often false-positives like RFC1918 networks, ...
\end{itemize}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.22]{warning-list.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{warning-list-event.png}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
@ -225,10 +236,10 @@
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Supporting specific datamodel}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{sighting-n.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{sighting-n.png}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Sightings2.PNG}
\includegraphics[scale=0.60]{Sightings2.PNG}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
@ -260,7 +271,7 @@
"OR": [
"misp-galaxy:threat-actor=\"Sofacy\"",
"misp-galaxy:sector=\"Chemical\""
]
],
}
}
\end{lstlisting}
@ -345,7 +356,7 @@
$$ \texttt{score}(\texttt{\tiny Attribute}) = \texttt{base\_score}(\texttt{\tiny Attribute, Model}) \;\;\bullet\;\; \texttt{decay}(\texttt{\tiny Model, time}) $$
Where,\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item \texttt{score} $ \in [0, +\infty $
\item \texttt{score} $ \in [0, 100] $
\item \texttt{base\_score} $ \in [0, 100] $
\item \texttt{decay} is a function defined by model's parameters controlling decay speed
\item \texttt{Attribute} Contains \textit{Attribute}'s values and metadata {\scriptsize (\textit{Taxonomies}, \textit{Galaxies}, ...)}

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 23 KiB

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 22 KiB

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 8.9 KiB

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 27 KiB

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 20 KiB