chg: [blog] post updated about decaying indicators

pull/15/head
Alexandre Dulaunoy 2019-09-10 15:11:01 +02:00
parent 63c75bcb6e
commit 51f1a48c00
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 09E2CD4944E6CBCD
1 changed files with 17 additions and 14 deletions

View File

@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
---
title: Decaying of Indicators - MISP improved model to expire indicators based on custom models
layout: post
featured: /assets/images/misp/blog/community-view.png
featured: /assets/images/misp/blog/decay.png
---
# An improved and flexible model to expire indicators
This blog post introduces the new functionality of MISP 2.4.116 which allows users and organisations to easily expire information depending on their objectives and targets.
MISP being a distributed system, various users and organisations are sharing data, sometimes without even knowing each others. While having access to a lot of information is extremely beneficial for all parties, it, however, also induces challenges to deal with.
In this blog post, we will mainly discuss about information **quality** and **freshness**, other issues like **trust**, **use-cases**, **interests**, etc. are partially taken into account but will not be presented. Nevertheless, these concepts are examined in this [paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.03914) along with a detailed explanation of the solution we have chosen to tackle these issues.
@ -32,11 +34,11 @@ Where ``P`` is composed of ``parameters``:
We still have to see how the ``base_score`` is actually computed. In the built-in version of the *Decaying Model* in MISP, the ``base_score`` is computed from the *Taxonomies* and some weight. Weights are a mean to prioritize extracted ``numerical_values`` from *Taxonomies* over others.
To give the intuition of how the ``base_score`` computation works, let's look at two examples. In these examples, the two *Taxonomies* used are
To give the intuition of how the ``base_score`` computation works, let's look at two examples. In these examples, the two *Taxonomies* used are
[*phishing*](https://github.com/MISP/misp-taxonomies/blob/master/phishing/machinetag.json) and [*admiralty-scale*](https://github.com/MISP/misp-taxonomies/blob/master/admiralty-scale/machinetag.json). Both of them contain *Tags* that have a ``numerical_value`` associated to them:
- <img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-as-A.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Completely reliable" width="300"/>, ``numerical_value = 100``
- <img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-as-D.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Not usually reliable" width="300"/>, ``numerical_value = 25``
- <img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-p-H.png" alt="phishing:psychological-acceptability = high" width="250"/>, ``numerical_value = 75``
- <img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-as-A.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Completely reliable" width="300"/>, ``numerical_value = 100``
- <img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-as-D.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Not usually reliable" width="300"/>, ``numerical_value = 25``
- <img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-p-H.png" alt="phishing:psychological-acceptability = high" width="250"/>, ``numerical_value = 75``
So, if an *Attribute* only have one *Tag* attached, let's say ``admiralty-scale:source-reliability="Completely reliable"``, the ``base_score`` would be:
```
@ -51,9 +53,9 @@ phishing = 50
---------------------
sum 100
```
If an *Attribute* has the *Tags* <img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/tag-as-A.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Completely reliable" width="300"/> and <img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//tag-p-H.png" alt="phishing:psychological-acceptability = high" width="250"/> attached, the computation steps would look like this:
If an *Attribute* has the *Tags* <img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/tag-as-A.png" alt="admiraly-scale:source-reliability = Completely reliable" width="300"/> and <img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/tag-p-H.png" alt="phishing:psychological-acceptability = high" width="250"/> attached, the computation steps would look like this:
<img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying//bs-computation-steps.png" alt="base_score comnputation steps" width="600"/>
![base_score computation steps](/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/bs-computation-steps.png)
Thus, the ``base_score`` of this *Attribute* will be ``87.50``.
@ -68,7 +70,7 @@ Now that we've seen the basic concepts, let's have a look at how MISP implements
At the *Event* level, a new filtering button has been added to attach the real-time computed ``score`` of any *Attributes* that has been mapped to a *Model*.
<img src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-event.png" alt="Decaying Model index" width="700"/>
<img src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-event.png" alt="Decaying Model index" width="700"/>
### Endpoint: ``attribute/restSearch``
@ -107,19 +109,19 @@ When creating a new *Decaying Model*, setting a parameters and viewing its impac
### Customizing lifetime and decay speed parameters
<video src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-tool.mp4" title="Decaying Model Fine Tuning Tool - Parameters" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
<video src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-tool.mp4" title="Decaying Model Fine Tuning Tool - Parameters" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
Your browser does not support the video tag.
</video>
### Setting the ``base_score``: Customizing Taxonomies' weight
<video src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-bs.mp4" type="video/mp4" title="Decaying Model Fine Tuning Tool - Base score" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
<video src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-bs.mp4" type="video/mp4" title="Decaying Model Fine Tuning Tool - Base score" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
Your browser does not support the video tag.
</video>
### Viewing scores and simulating the model
<video src="../assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-simulation.mp4" type="video/mp4" title="Decaying Model Simulation Tool" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
<video src="/assets/images/misp/blog/decaying/dm-simulation.mp4" type="video/mp4" title="Decaying Model Simulation Tool" width="800" height="450" controls autoplay loop>
Your browser does not support the video tag.
</video>
@ -148,7 +150,8 @@ class Polynomial extends DecayingModelBase
public function isDecayed($model, $attribute, $score)
{
// algorithm returning a boolean stating if the attribute is expired or not
// algorithm returning a boolean stating
// if the attribute is expired or not
}
}
?>
@ -158,10 +161,10 @@ class Polynomial extends DecayingModelBase
Evaluating **quality** and **freshness** of IOCs is a problem commonly found in Threat Intelligence Platforms. We tried to solve it using a simple yet customizable system.
Upon release, MISP will be shipped with few models that could fit most use-cases. Still, we are eagerly waiting for contributions, fine-tunings or feedbacks from users. This would opens up plenty of opportunities includings improved *Models*' precision, parameters tweaking or even integration of machine learning as a new *Model* algorithm.
Upon release, MISP will be shipped with few models that could fit most use-cases. Still, we are eagerly waiting for contributions, fine-tunings or feedbacks from users. This would opens up plenty of opportunities including improved *Models*' precision, parameters tweaking or even integration of machine learning as a new *Model* algorithm.
Furthermore, we are not done yet! There are already improvements cooking in the MISP-Project oven,
- Integration of ``False Positive`` and ``Expiration`` *Sightings*
- Formula tweakings to provide better control on how to reset the ``base_score`` once a *Sighting* is created
- Formula tweaking to provide better control on how to reset the ``base_score`` once a *Sighting* is created
- Per-user Taxonomies' ``numerical_value`` overrides
- Weights on *Tag*'s predicate level