[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-meijer-inch-iodef) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 RFC 5070

INCH Working Group                                             J. Meijer
Draft-ietf-inch-iodef-03.txt                                  SURFnet bv
Expires: May 10, 2005                                         R. Danyliw
                                                CERT Coordination Center
                                                            Y. Demchenko
                                                              NLnet Labs
                                                        November 9, 2004


   The Incident Object Description Exchange Format Data Model and XML
                             Implementation
                      draft-ietf-inch-iodef-03.txt

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
   patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or
   will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed,
   in accordance with RFC 3668.

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as
   Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 10, 2005.

Abstract

   The purpose of the Incident Object Description Exchange Format
   (IODEF) is to define a data representation that provides a framework
   for sharing information commonly exchanged by Computer Security
   Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs) about computer security incidents.
   The IODEF satisfies the requirements specified in  RFCXXX [1]

   This Internet-Draft describes a data model for representing incident



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   information exported from incident handling systems managed by
   CSIRTs.  An implementation of the data model in the Extensible Markup
   Language (XML) is presented, an XML Document Type Definition is
   developed, and examples are provided.

Table of Contents

   1.   Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.1  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.3  About the IODEF Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.4  About the IODEF Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     1.5  About the Transport Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     1.6  Related Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   2.   Formatting Issues  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     2.1  IODEF XML Documents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.1.1  The Document Prolog  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.1.2  White Space Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       2.1.3  Languages in the IODEF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.2  IODEF Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       2.2.1  Integers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.2  Real Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.3  Characters and Strings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.4  Bytes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.5  Enumerated Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.2.6  Date-Time Strings  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.7  Port Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.8  Postal Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.9  Person or Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.10   Telephone and Fax Numbers  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.11   Email string . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.12   Uniform Resource Identifier strings  . . . . . . . .  11
       2.2.13   Timezone string  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       2.2.14   Unique Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   3.   The IODEF Data Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.1  IODEF-Document class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.2  Incident class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.3  IncidentID class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     3.4  AlternativeID class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     3.5  RelatedActivity class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     3.6  AdditionalData . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     3.7  Contact class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       3.7.1  RegistryHandle class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     3.8  Time classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       3.8.1  StartTime  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       3.8.2  EndTime  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       3.8.3  DetectTime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
       3.8.4  ReportTime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


       3.8.5  DateTime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     3.9  Expectation class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .  23
     3.10   Method class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
       3.10.1   Classification class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     3.11   Assessment class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
       3.11.1   Impact class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
       3.11.2   TimeImpact class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
       3.11.3   MonetaryImpact class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
       3.11.4   Confidence class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
     3.12   History class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
       3.12.1   HistoryItem class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     3.13   EventData class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
       3.13.1   Relating the Incident and EventData classes  . . . .  34
       3.13.2   Cardinality of EventData . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
     3.14   Flow class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
     3.15   System class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
     3.16   Node class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  38
       3.16.1   Counter class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  40
       3.16.2   Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  40
       3.16.3   NodeRole class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
     3.17   Process class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
     3.18   Service class  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
     3.19   Record class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  44
       3.19.1   RecordData class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
       3.19.2   Analyzer class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
       3.19.3   RecordItem class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
   4.   Extending the IODEF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
     4.1  Extending the data model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
     4.2  Extending the XML DTD  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  48
   5.   Processing Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51
   6.   Internationalization issues  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  52
   7.   Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53
     7.1  Code Red detection notification  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53
     7.2  IODEF-Document with XML signature  . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
     7.3  IODEF-Document encrypted using XML encryption  . . . . . .  55
     7.4  IODEF-Document encrypted and signed using XML signature
          & encryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
   8.   The IODEF Document Type Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
   9.   Security considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  67
   10.  IANA considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  68
   11.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  69
   12.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  70
   12.1   Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  70
   12.2   Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  71
        Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  71
        Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . .  72





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


1.  Introduction

1.1  Terminology

   The key words "MUST," "MUST NOT," "REQUIRED," "SHALL," "SHALL NOT,"
   "SHOULD," "SHOULD NOT," "RECOMMENDED," "MAY," and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [5].

   Definitions for some of the common computer security-related
   terminology used in this document can be found in Section 2 of [1].

1.2  Overview

   The Incident Object Description Exchange Format (IODEF) is a format
   for representing computer security information exchanged between
   Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs).  It provides a
   transport representation conforming to the requirements specified in
   [1], Requirements for Format for Incident Report Exchange.

   The overriding purpose of the IODEF is to expand and enhance the
   operational capabilities of CSIRTs.  Community adoption of the IODEF
   provides an improved ability to resolve incidents by simplifying
   collaboration and data sharing.  This structured format provided by
   the IODEF allows for:

   o  increased automation in processing of incident data, since the
      resources of security analysts to parse free-form textual
      documents will be reduced;

   o  decreased effort in normalizing similar data (even when highly
      structured) from different sources; and

   o  a common format on which to build interoperable tools for incident
      handling, such as correlation systems that process data from
      different sites.

   Terminology, notation, and conventions of the data model and XML DTD
   are presented in Sections 2.  The data model is described in Section
   3, and the implementation considerations are covered in Sections 4
   through 6.  Section 7 provides several examples of IODEF documents.
   Section 8 formally specifies the XML DTD implementation of the data
   model.  Sections 9 and 10 address the security and IANA
   considerations, respectively.

1.3  About the IODEF Data Model

   The IODEF data model is a data representation that provides a
   framework for sharing information commonly exchanged by CSIRTs about



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   computer security incidents.  A number of considerations were made in
   the design of the data model.

   o  The intent of the data model is to support the automated
      processing of incident data.  Hence, little consideration was made
      to ensure human-readability.  Despite the still prevalent practice
      of manual incident report generation, this model is sufficiently
      complex that it will be unwieldy to create and process without
      software.

   o  The data model serves as a transport format.  Therefore, its
      specific representation is not the optimal representation for
      on-disk storage, long-term archiving, or in-memory processing.

   o  Since there is no precise, widely agreed upon definition for an
      incident, the data model does not attempt to dictate one through
      its implementation.  Rather, a broad understanding is assumed that
      is flexible enough to encompass most of the CSIRT community.

   o  Describing an incident for all definitions would require an
      incredibly complex data model.  Therefore, the IODEF data model
      only intends to be a framework to convey commonly exchanged
      incident information.  However, it ensures that there are ample
      mechanisms for extensibility to support organization-specific
      information, and techniques to reference information kept outside
      of the explicit data model.

   o  Incidents have a life-cycle that dictates the exact type,
      quantity, and detail of the data that will be present at a given
      time (e.g., newly reported incidents may only contain the most
      rudimentary details, but closed incidents may contain a detailed
      analysis).  The data model deals with this situation.

   o  Communication and coordination are central to the role of a CSIRT.
      Hence, tracking the source of all data is central to handling the
      incident.  Therefore, the data model provides ways to explicitly
      bind information to a source, and accommodates differences in the
      types of parties involved in the incident (e.g., varying levels of
      confidence in information, different data sharing arrangements).


1.4  About the IODEF Implementation

   The IODEF implementation uses the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
   [2], specifies an XML Document Type Definition (DTD), and registers
   an application-specific namespace [3].


   For clarity in this document, the terms "XML" and "XML documents"



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   will be used when referring to the Extensible Markup Language (XML).
   The terms "IODEF description", "IODEF markup" and "IODEF document"
   will be used to refer to specific elements (tags) and attributes of
   the IODEF DTD.  Finally, the terms "class" and "subclass" will be
   used as synonyms for an XML element.

   The choice to implement the IODEF in XML was made because it
   provides:

   o  all the necessary features to define and extend a specific markup
      language for describing security incidents;

   o  a well understood technique for supporting internationalization
      and localization;

   o  a base of related technologies such as XSL [4], XPATH, and XML-SIG
      that the aid in the manipulation and use of the incident data; and

   o  a broad community of developers who already understand how to
      build systems around data exchanged in this format.

   While XML provides a useful implementation language for IODEF, this
   implementation also dictates several limitations.

   o  XML is a text representation making it inherently inefficient
      either when binary data must be embedded, or very large volumes of
      data must be exchanged.

   o  The data model is designed as a transport representation, and the
      use of XML further reinforces the inefficiency of using the IODEF
      for other purposes.  Due to the overhead of the parser, XML is not
      an optimal in-memory representation.  Furthermore, storing,
      searching, and retrieving native XML documents is problematic on a
      large scale dictating that this format is also a poor choice as a
      storage and archive format.


1.5  About the Transport Protocol

   Currently, there is no transport protocol specified for exchanging
   IODEF documents.  The working group has realized that this omission
   is an inpediment to interoperability, and is working on identifying
   candidate protocols.  It is likely that SOAP will be used as the
   messaging envelope, and HTTP will be the underlying transport.

1.6  Related Work

   The IODEF is only one of several security relevant data



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   representations being standardized.  Specifically, the complementary
   nature of the Intrusion Detection Message Exchange Format [7] bears
   mention given that many incidents represented in the IODEF may have
   first been discovered through the use of intrusion detection system
   output formatted according to the IDMEF.  Given this relationship,
   the IODEF data model makes use of certain classes defined in the
   IDMEF data model.












































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 7]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


2.  Formatting Issues

2.1  IODEF XML Documents

   This document uses three notations: the Unified Modeling Language
   (UML) to describe the data model, an XML Document Type Definition
   (DTD) to define the IODEF syntax, and IODEF XML markup conforming to
   the specified DTD to represent the incident data.

   This section describes the XML notations and conventions used in this
   document and explains particular issues related to using them to
   describe the IODEF data model and syntax.  For readers unfamiliar
   with these notations [17] and [7] will provide a comprehensive
   reference.

2.1.1  The Document Prolog

   The "prolog" of an XML document, that part that precedes anything
   else, consists of the XML declaration and the document type
   declaration.

2.1.1.1  XML Declaration

   Every IODEF document MUST begin with an XML declaration, and MUST
   specify the XML version used.  If UTF-8 encoded is not used, the
   character encoding MUST also be explicitly specified.

   The XML declaration with no character encoding will read as follows:

   <?xml version="1.0" ?>

   When a character encoding is specified, the XML declaration will read
   like the following:

   <?xml version="1.0" encoding="charset" ?>

   where "charset" is the name of the character encoding as registered
   with the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), see [9].

   Consistent with the XML standard, if no encoding is specified for an
   IODEF document, UTF-8 is assumed.  IODEF documents encoded in UTF-16
   MUST begin with the Byte Order Mark described by ISO/IEC 10646 Annex
   E and Unicode Appendix B (the "ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE" character,
   #xFEFF).

2.1.1.2  IODEF DTD Formal Public Identifier

   The formal public identifier (FPI) for the IODEF Document Type



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 8]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   Definition described in this document is:

        "-//IETF//DTD RFCxxxx IODEF v0.0//EN"

   NOTE: The "RFCxxxx" text in the FPI value will be replaced with the
   actual RFC number when this document is published as an RFC.

   This FPI MUST be used in the document type declaration within an XML
   document referencing the IODEF DTD as shown in Section 2.1.1.3.

2.1.1.3  IODEF DTD Document Type Declaration

   The document type declaration for an XML document referencing the
   IODEF DTD MUST be specified either by referencing the FPI (see
   Section 2.1.1.2) as follows:

    <!DOCTYPE IODEF-Document PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD RFCxxxx IODEF v0.0//EN">

    or by providing a URI that references a copy of the DTD as follows:

    <!DOCTYPE IODEF-Document SYSTEM "/path/to/IODEF-Document.dtd">


2.1.2  White Space Processing

   All IODEF elements support the "xml:space" attribute.  If "xml:space"
   is set to "preserve," the IODEF processing application MUST treat all
   white space in the element's content as significant.  If "xml:space"
   is set to "default," the application is free to decide on the
   handling of the whitepace.

2.1.3  Languages in the IODEF

   For the IODEF elements that support free-form text, the "xml:lang"
   attribute can be used to identify the language of its contents.  The
   valid language codes for the "xml:lang" attribute are described in
   RFC 3066 [6].

   IODEF messages SHOULD specify the language in which their contents
   are encoded.  In general, the language can be specified with the
   "xml:lang" attribute in the top-level element and letting all other
   elements "inherit" that definition.

   If no language is specified, English SHOULD be assumed.

2.2  IODEF Data Types

   The IODEF data model defines a number of data types.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                  [Page 9]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


2.2.1  Integers

   Integer attributes are represented by the INTEGER data type.  Integer
   data MUST be encoded in Base 10 or Base 16.

   Base 10 integer encoding uses the digits '0' through '9' and an
   optional sign ('+' or '-').  For example, "123", "-456".

   Base 16 integer encoding uses the digits '0' through '9' and 'a'
   through 'f' (or their upper case equivalents), and is preceded by the
   characters "0x".  For example, "0x1a2b".

2.2.2  Real Numbers

   Real (floating-point) attributes are represented by the REAL data
   type.  Real data MUST be encoded in Base 10.

   Real encoding is that of the POSIX "strtod" library function: an
   optional sign ('+' or '-') followed by a non-empty string of decimal
   digits, optionally containing a radix character, then an optional
   exponent part.  An exponent part consists of an 'e' or 'E', followed
   by an optional sign, followed by one
 or more decimal digits.  For
   example, "123.45e02", "-567,89e-03".

   IODEF-compliant applications MUST support both the '.' and ',' radix
   characters.

2.2.3  Characters and Strings

   Single-character attributes are represented by the CHARACTER data
   type.  Multi-character attributes of known length are represented by
   the STRING data type.

   Character and string data have no special formatting requirements,
   other than the need to occasionally use character references to
   represent special characters.

2.2.4  Bytes

   Binary data is represented by the BYTE (and BYTE[]) data type.

   Binary data MUST be encoded in its entirety using character code
   references (see ).

2.2.5  Enumerated Types

   Enumerated types are represented by the ENUM data type, and consist
   of an ordered list of acceptable values.  Each value has a



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 10]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   representative keyword.  Within an IODEF DTD, the enumerated type
   keywords are used as attribute values.

2.2.6  Date-Time Strings

   Date-time strings are represented by the DATETIME data type.  Each
   date-time string identifies a particular instant in time; ranges are
   not supported.

   Date-time strings are formatted according to a subset of ISO
   8601:2000 [13] documented in RFC 3339 [12].

2.2.7  Port Lists

   A list of network ports are represented by the PORTLIST data type,
   and consist of a comma-separated list of numbers (individual
   integers) and ranges (N-M means ports N through M, inclusive).  Any
   combination of numbers and ranges may be used in a single list.  For
   example, "5-25,37,42,43,53,69-119,123-514".

2.2.8  Postal Address

   A postal address is represented by the POSTAL data type.  The format
   of this address data is documented in Sections 5.17 - 5.19 of RFC
   2256 [10].

2.2.9  Person or Organization

   The name of an individual or organization is represented by the NAME
   data type.  The format of the NAME data type is documented in Section
   5.4 of RFC 2256 [10].

2.2.10  Telephone and Fax Numbers

   A telephone number is represented by the PHONE data type.  The format
   of the PHONE data type is documented in Section 5.21 of RFC 2256
   [10].

2.2.11  Email string

   An email address is represented by the EMAIL data type.  The format
   of the EMAIL data type is documented in Section 3.4.1 RFC 2822 [11]

2.2.12  Uniform Resource Identifier strings

   A uniform resource identifier (URI) is represented by the URI data
   type.  The format of the URI data type is documented in RFC 2396 [8].




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 11]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


2.2.13  Timezone string

   A timezone is represented by the TIMEZONE data type.  Its format is
   yet to be specified.

2.2.14  Unique Identifiers

   A unique identifier in the context of particular creator of IODEF
   documents (e.g., a CSIRT) is represented by the UID data type.  A
   globally unique identifier is represented by the GUID data type.  The
   UID and GUID data types are constructed from alphanumeric strings.








































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 12]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.  The IODEF Data Model

   In this section, the individual components of the IODEF data model
   will be discussed in detail.  For each class, the semantics will be
   documented and the relationship with other classes with be depicted
   with UML.

3.1  IODEF-Document class

   The IODEF-Document class is the top level class in the IODEF data
   model.  All IODEF documents are an instance of this class.


   +-----------------+
   | IODEF-Document  |
   +-----------------+
   | STRING version  |<>--{1..*}--[ Incident ]
   |                 |
   +-----------------+

                     Figure 1: IODEF-Document class

   The aggregate class that constitutes IODEF-Document is:

   Incident
      One or more.  The information related to a single incident.

   The IODEF-Document class has one attribute:

   version
      Required.  STRING.  The IODEF specification version number to
      which the IODEF document conforms.  The value of this attribute
      MUST be 1.0


3.2  Incident class

   Every incident is represented by an instance of the Incident class.
   This class provides a standardized representation for commonly
   exchanged incident data and associates a CSIRT assigned unique
   identifier with the described activity.










Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 13]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +-------------------+
   | Incident          |
   +-------------------+
   | ENUM purpose      |<>----------[ IncidentID      ]
   | ENUM restriction  |<>--{0..1}--[ AlternativeID   ]
   |                   |<>--{0..1}--[ RelatedActivity ]
   |                   |<>--{0..*}--[ Description     ]
   |                   |<>--{1..*}--[ Assessment      ]
   |                   |<>--{0..*}--[ Method          ]
   |                   |<>--{0..1}--[ DetectTime      ]
   |                   |<>--{0..1}--[ StartTime       ]
   |                   |<>--{0..1}--[ EndTime         ]
   |                   |<>----------[ ReportTime      ]
   |                   |<>--{1..*}--[ Contact         ]
   |                   |<>--{0..*}--[ Expectation     ]
   |                   |<>--{0..1}--[ History         ]
   |                   |<>--{0..*}--[ EventData       ]
   |                   |<>--{0..*}--[ AdditionalData  ]
   +-------------------+

                      Figure 2: the Incident class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Incident are:

   IncidentID
      One.  An incident tracking number assigned to this incident by the
      CSIRT that generated the IODEF document.

   AlternativeID
      Zero or one.  A list of incident tracking numbers used by other
      CSIRTs to refer to the incident described in the document.

   RelatedActivity
      Zero or one.  A list of incident tracking numbers of related
      incidents.

   Description
      Zero or more.  STRING.  A free-form textual description of the
      incident.

   Assessment
      One or more.  A characterization of the impact of the incident.

   Method
      Zero or more.  The techniques used by the intruder in the
      incident.





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 14]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   DetectTime
      Zero or one.  The time the incident was first detected.

   StartTime
      Zero or one.  The time the incident started.

   EndTime
      Zero or one.  The time the incident ended.

   ReportTime
      One.  The time the incident was reported.

   Contact
      One or more.  Contact information for the parties involved in the
      incident.

   Expectation
      Zero or more.  Expected action to be performed by the recipient of
      the document.

   History
      Zero or one.  A log of significant events or actions that occurred
      during the course of handling the incident.

   EventData
      Zero or more.  Description of the events comprising the incident,

   AdditionalData
      Zero or more.  Mechanism by which to extend the data model.

   The Incident class has two attributes:

   purpose
      Required.  ENUM.  The purpose attribute represents the reason why
      the IODEF document was created.  It is closely related to the
      Expectation class (Section 3.9).  This attribute is defined as an
      enumerated list:

      1.  handling.  The document was sent for incident-handling

purposes;

      2.  statistics.  The document was sent to be included in a
          data-repository for statistical purposes;

      3.  warning.  The document was sent as a warning;

      4.  other.  The document was sent for purposes specified in the
          Expectation element.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 15]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute indicates the disclosure
      guidelines to which the sender expects the recipient of the
      IODEF-Document to adhere.  Naturally, this provides no real
      security since it is the choice of the recipient of the document
      to honor this guideline.

      The value of this attribute is logically inherited by the children
      of this class.  That is to say, the disclosure rules applied to
      this class, also apply to its children.

      It is possible to set a granular disclosure policy, since all of
      the high-level classes (i.e., children of the Incident class) have
      a restriction attribute.  Therefore, a child can override the
      guidelines of a parent class, be it to restrict or relax the
      disclosure rules (i.e., a child has a weaker policy than an
      ancestor; or an ancestor has a weak policy, and the children
      selectively apply more rigid controls).  The implicit value of the
      restriction attribute for a class that did not specify one can be
      found in the closest ancestor that did specify a value.

      This attribute is defined as an enumerated value with a default
      value of "private".

      Note that the default value of the restriction attribute is only
      defined in the context of the Incident class.  In other classes
      where this attribute is used, no default is specified.

      1.  public.  There are no restrictions placed in the information;

      2.  need-to-know.  The information may be shared with other
          parties that are involved in the incident (e.g., multiple
          victim sites can be informed of each other);

      3.  private.  The information may not be shared.

      4.  default.  The information can be shared according to an
          information disclosure policy pre-arranged by the
          communicating parties.



3.3  IncidentID class

   The IncidentID class represents an incident tracking number (UID)
   that is unique in the context of the CSIRT and identifies the
   activity characterized in an IODEF-Document.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 16]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | IncidentID       |
   +------------------+
   | UID              |
   |                  |
   | GUID   name      |
   +------------------+

                     Figure 3: the IncidentID class

   The IncidentID class has one attribute:

   name
      Required.  GUID.  An identifier for the CSIRT that created the
      IODEF-Document.


3.4  AlternativeID class

   The AlternativeID class lists the incident tracking numbers used by
   other CSIRTs to refer to activity described in this IODEF document.
   Thus, a tracking number listed as an AlternativeID references the
   same incident detected by another CSIRT.  The incident tracking
   numbers of the CSIRT that generated the IODEF document should never
   be considered an AlternativeID.


         +------------------+
         | AlternativeID    |
         +------------------+
         | ENUM restriction |<>--{1..*}--[ IncidentID ]
         |                  |
         +------------------+


                   Figure 4: the AlternativeID class

   The aggregate class that constitutes AlternativeID is:

   IncidentID
      One or more.  The incident tracking number of another CSIRT.

   The AlternativeID class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 17]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.5  RelatedActivity class

   The RelatedActivity class lists the incident tracking numbers of
   incidents that are related to the one described in the IODEF
   document.  These references may be to local incident tracking
   numbers, as well as, to those of other CSIRTs.

   The specifics of how a CSIRT came to believe that two incidents are
   related is considered out of scope.


         +------------------+
         | RelatedActivity  |
         +------------------+
         | ENUM restriction |<>--{1..*}--[ IncidentID ]
         |                  |
         +------------------+

                    Figure 5: RelatedActivity class

   The aggregate class that constitutes RelatedActivity is:

   IncidentID
      One or more.  The incident tracking number of a related incident.

   The RelatedActivity class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.


3.6  AdditionalData

   The AdditionalData class serves as an extension mechanism for
   information not otherwise represented in the data model.  For
   relatively simple information, atomic data types (e.g., integers,
   strings) are provided with a mechanism to annotate their meaning.
   The class can also be used to extend the data model and the DTD to
   support proprietary extensions by encapsulating entire XML documents
   conforming to another DTD (e.g., IDMEF).  A detailed discussion for
   extending the data model and the DTD can be found in Section 4.

   Unlike XML, which is self-describing, atomic data must be documented
   to convey its meaning.  This information is described in the
   'meaning' attribute.  Since these description are outside the scope
   of the specification, some additional coordination may be required to
   ensure that a recipient of a document using the AdditionalData
   classes can make sense of the custom extensions.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 18]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | AdditionalData   |
   +------------------+
   | ANY              |
   |                  |
   | ENUM restriction |
   | ENUM type        |
   | STRING meaning   |
   +------------------+

                   Figure 6: the AdditionalData class

   The AdditionalData class has three attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.

   type
      Required.  ENUM.  The data type of the element content.  The
      permitted values for this attribute are shown below.  The default
      value is "string".

      1.  boolean.  The element contains a boolean value, i.e., the
          strings "true" or "false"

      2.  byte.  The element content is a single 8-bit byte (see Section
          2.2.4);

      3.  character.  The element content is a single character (see
          Section 2.2.3);

      4.  date-time.  The element content is a date-time string (see
          Section 2.2.6);

      5.  integer.  The element content is an integer (see Section
          2.2.1);

      6.  portlist.  The element content is a port list (see Section
          2.2.7);

      7.  real.  The element content is a real number (see Section
          2.2.2);

      8.  string.  The element content is a string (see Section 2.2.3);

      9.  xml.  The element content is XML-tagged data (see Section 4).





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 19]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   meaning
      Optional.  STRING.  A description of the semantics of the custom
      data in this class.


3.7  Contact class

   The Contact class describes contact informa
tion for organizations and
   personnel involved in the incident.  This class allows for the naming
   of the involved party, specifying contact information for them, and
   identifying their role in the incident.

   People and organizations are treated interchangeably as contacts; one
   can be associated with the other using the recursive definition of
   the class (the Contact class is aggregated into the Contact class).
   The 'type' attribute disambiguates the type of contact information
   being provided.

   This recursive definition provides a way to relate information
   without requiring the explicit use of identifiers in the classes.
   For example, seperate contact information for two individuals from
   the same organization would not require duplicating the organization
   information.


   +------------------+
   | Contact          |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..1}--[ name           ]
   | ENUM role        |<>--{0..*}--[ Description    ]
   | ENUM type        |<>--{0..*}--[ RegistryHandle ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ PostalAddress  ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Email          ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Telephone      ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Fax            ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Timezone       ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Contact        ]
   +------------------+

                      Figure 7: the Contact class

   The aggregate classes that constitute the Contact class are:

   name
      Zero or one.  NAME.  The name of the contact.  The contact may
      either be an organization or a person.  The type attribute
      disambiguates the semantics.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 20]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   Description
      Zero or one.  STRING.  Free-form description of the this contact.
      In the case of a person, this is often the organizational title of
      the individual.

   RegistryHandle
      Zero or many.  A handle name in a registry.

   PostalAddress
      Zero or one.  POSTAL.  The postal address of the contact formatted
      according to Section 2.2.8.

   Email
      Zero or many.  EMAIL.  The email address of the contact formatted
      according to Section 2.2.11.

   Telephone
      Zero or many.  PHONE.  The telephone number of the contact
      formatted according to Section 2.2.10.

   Fax
      Zero or one.  PHONE.  The facsimile telephone number of the
      contact formatted according to Section 2.2.10.

   Timezone
      Zero or one.  TIMEZONE.  The timezone in which the contact resides
      formatted according to Section 2.2.13.

   Contact
      Zero or many.  Recursive definition of Contact allowing for the
      grouping of information.

   The Contact class has three attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.

   role
      Required.  ENUM.  Indicates the role the contact fulfills.  This
      attribute is defined as an enumerated list:

      1.  creator.  The entity that generate the IODEF document.

      2.  admin.  An administrative contact for a host or network.

      3.  tech.  A technical contact for a host or network.

      4.  irt.  The CSIRT involved in handling the incident.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 21]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


      5.  cc.  An entity that is to be kept informed about the handling
          of the incident.

   type
      Required.  ENUM.  Indicates the type of contact being described.
      This attribute is defined as an enumerated list:

      1.  person.

      2.  organization.


3.7.1  RegistryHandle class

   The RegistryHandle class represents a handle to an Internet registry
   or community-specific database.  A handle consists of a name
   specified in the element content, and the database to which it
   belongs specified in the type attribute.


   +------------------+
   | RegistryHandle   |
   +------------------+
   | STRING           |
   |                  |
   | ENUM type        |
   +------------------+

                   Figure 8: The RegistryHandle class

   The RegistryHandle class has one attribute:

   type
      Required.  ENUM.  The database to which the handle belongs.  The
      default value is 'local'.  The possible values are:

      1.  internic.  Internet Network Information Center

      2.  apnic.  Asia Pacific Network Information Center

      3.  arin.  American Registry for Internet Numbers

      4.  lacnic.  Regional Latin-American and Caribbean IP Address
          Registry

      5.  ripe.  Reseaux IP Europeens

      6.  local.  A database local to the CSIRT.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 22]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.8  Time classes

   The data model uses five different classes to represent a timestamp.
   Their definition is identical, but each has a distinct name to convey
   a difference in semantics.

   The element content of each class is a timestamp formated according
   to the DATETIME data type (see Section 2.2.6).


   +----------------------------------+
   | {Start| End| Report| Detect}Time |
   +----------------------------------+
   | DATETIME                         |
   +----------------------------------+

                       Figure 9: the Time classes


3.8.1  StartTime

   The StartTime class represents the time the incident began.

3.8.2  EndTime

   The EndTime class represents the time the incident ended.

3.8.3  DetectTime

   The DetectTime class represents the time the first activity of the
   incident was detected.

3.8.4  ReportTime

   The ReportTime class represents the time the incident was reported.
   This timestamp SHOULD coincide to the time at which the IODEF
   document is generated.

3.8.5  DateTime

   The DateTime class is a generic representation of a timestamp.  Its
   semantics should be inferred from the parent class into which it is
   aggregated.

3.9  Expectation class

   The Expectation class conveys to the recipient of the IODEF document
   the actions the sender is requesting.



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 23]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | Expectation      |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{1..*}--[ Description ]
   | ENUM priority    |<>--{0..1}--[ StartTime   ]
   | ENUM category    |<>--{0..1}--[ EndTime     ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Contact     ]
   +------------------+

                    Figure 10: the Expectation class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Expectation are:

   Description
      One or many.  STRING.  A free-form description of the desired
      action(s).

   StartTime
      Zero or one.  The time at which the action should be performed.  A
      timestamp that is earlier than the ReportTime specified in the
      Incident class denotes that the expectation should be fulfilled as
      soon as possible.  The absence of this element leaves the
      execution of the expectation to the discretion of the recipient.

   EndTime
      Zero or one.  The time by which the action should be completed.
      If the action is not carried out by this time, it should no longer
      be performed.

   Contact
      Zero or one.  The expected actor for the action.

   The Expectations class has three attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.

   priority
      Optional.  ENUM.  Indicates the desired priority of the action.
      This attribute is an enumerated list with no default value.

      1.  low.  Low priority

      2.  medium.  Medium priority


      3.  high.  High priority





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 24]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   category
      Optional.  ENUM.  Classifies the type of action requested.  This
      attribute is an enumerated list with no default value.

      1.  nothing.  No action is requested.  Do nothing with the
          information.

      2.  contact-site.  Contact the listed site in the recipient's
          constituency.

      3.  contact-me.  Contact the originator of the document.

      4.  investigate.  Investigate the machine(s) listed in the
          document.

      5.  block.  Block traffic from the machine(s) listed in the
          document.

      6.  other.  Perform some custom action described in the
          Description class.


3.10  Method class

   The Method class describes the methodology used by the intruder to
   perpetrate the events of the incident.  This class can reference
   well-known vulnerability or exploit databases; the intruder tools
   used in the attack; and provide a free-form description of the
   activity.

   +------------------+
   | Method           |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..*}--[ Classification ]
   |                  |
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Description    ]
   +------------------+

                      Figure 11: The Method class

   The Method class is composed of two aggregate classes.

   Classification
      Zero or many.  A reference to a well-known vulnerability or
      exploit databases.






Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 25]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   Description
      Zero or many.  STRING.  A free-form text description of the
      methodology used by the intruder.

   The Method class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.


3.10.1  Classification class

   The Classification class is a reference to an external database of
   computer vulnerabilities, exposures, or viruses.  A reference
   consists of the database name, the entry name in the database, and
   the URI to this entry.

   +------------------+
   | Classification   |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>----------[ name ]
   | ENUM origin      |<>--{0..1}--[ url  ]
   +------------------+

                  Figure 12: The Classification class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Classification:

   name
      One.  STRING.  The key into the database specified in the origin
      attribute.

   url
      Zero or One.  URI.  A URL to additional information about the
      vulnerability or exposure referenced by the name.

   The Classification class has two attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.

   origin
      Required.  ENUM.  The name of the database to which the reference
      is being made.  The permitted values are shown below.

      1.  bugtraqid.  Bugtraq

      2.  cve.  Mitre Common Vulnerabilities or Exposures



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 26]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


      3.  certcc.  CERT Coordination Center Vulnerability Catalog

      4.  vendor.  A product vendor whose name should be specified in
          the name class

      5.  local.  A local database.

      6.  other.  A custom database whose URL is specified in the url
          class, and the name of the entry is specified in the name
          class.


3.11  Assessment class

   The Assessment class describes the technical and non-technical
   repercussions of the incident on the CSIRT's constituency.

   Note: The IODEF definition of the Assessment class reuses the IDMEF
   definition (see Section 4.2.4.5 of [7]), but also extends it.


         +------------------+
         | Assessment       |
         +------------------+
         | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..*}--[ Impact         ]
         |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ TimeImpact     ]
         |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ MonetaryImpact ]
         |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Confidence     ]
         +------------------+

                      Figure 13: Assessment class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Assessment are:

   Impact
      Zero or many.  Technical impact of the incident on a network.

   TimeImpact
      Zero or many.  Impact of the activity measured with respect to
      time.

   MonetaryImpact
      Zero or many.  Impact of the activity measured with respect to
      financial loss.

   Confidence
      Zero or one.  An estimate of confidence in the assessment.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 27]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   The Assessment class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.


3.11.1  Impact class

   The Impact class allows for categorizing and describing the technical
   impact of the incident on the network of an organization.

   Note: The IODEF definition of the Impact class reuses the IDMEF
   definition (see Section 4.2.6.1 of [7]).

3.11.2  TimeImpact class

   The TimeImpact class describes the impact of the incident on an
   organization as a function of time.  It provides a way to convey down
   time and recovery time.


         +------------------+
         | TimeImpact       |
         +------------------+
         | REAL             |
         |                  |
         | ENUM severity    |
         | ENUM metric      |
         | ENUM units       |
         +------------------+

                      Figure 14: TimeImpact class

   The element content will be a numeric value (REAL) specifying a unit
   of time.  The unit and metric attributes will imply the semantics of
   the element content.

   The TimeImpact class has three attributes:

   severity
      Optional.  ENUM.  An estimate of the relative severity of the
      activity.  The permitted values are shown below.  There is no
      default value.

      1.  low.  Low severity

      2.  medium.  Medium severity




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 28]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


      3.  high.  High severity

   metric
      Required.  ENUM.  Defines the metric in which the time is
      expressed.  The permitted values are shown below.  There is no
      default value.

      1.  labor.  Total staff-time to recovery from the activity (e.g.,
          2 employees working 4 hours each would be 8 hours)

      2.  elapsed.  Elapsed time from the beginning of the recovery to
          its completion.

      3.  downtime.  Duration of time for which some provided service(s)
          was not available.

   units
      Required.  ENUM.  Defines the units in which the element content
      is expressed.  The permitted values are shown below.  The default
      value is "hours".

      1.  seconds.  Seconds.

      2.  minutes.  Minutes.

      3.  hours.  Hours.

      4.  days.  Days.


3.11.3  MonetaryImpact class

   The MonetaryImpact class describes the financial impact of the
   activity on an organization.  For example, this impact may consider
   losses due to the cost of the investigation or recovery, diminished
   productivity of the staff, or a tarnished reputation that will affect
   future opportunities.














Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 29]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


         +------------------+
         | MonetaryImpact   |
         +------------------+
         | REAL
      |
         |                  |
         | ENUM severity    |
         | STRING currency  |
         +------------------+

                    Figure 15: MonetaryImpact class

   The element content will be a numeric value (REAL) specifying a unit
   of currency described in the currency attribute.

   The MonetaryImpact class has two attributes:

   severity
      Optional.  ENUM.  An estimate of the relative severity of the
      activity.  The permitted values are shown below.  There is no
      default value.

      1.  low.  Low severity

      2.  medium.  Medium severity

      3.  high.  High severity

   currency
      Required.  ENUM.  Defines the currency in which the monetary
      impact is expressed.  The permitted values are defined in ISO
      4217:2001, Codes for the representation  of currencies and funds
      [16].  There is no default value.


3.11.4  Confidence class

   The Confidence class represents a best estimate of the validity and
   accuracy of the described impact (see Section 3.11) of the incident
   activity.  This estimate can be expressed as a category, or a numeric
   calculation.

   Note: The IODEF definition of the Confidence class reuses the IDMEF
   definition (see Section 4.2.6.3 of [7]).

3.12  History class

   The History class is a log of the significant events or actions
   performed by the involved parties during the course of handling the



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 30]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   incident.

   The level of detail maintained in this log is left up to the
   discretion of those handling the incident.


   +------------------+
   | History          |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{1..*}--[ HistoryItem ]
   |                  |
   +------------------+

                      Figure 16: The History class

   The class that constitutes History is:

   HistoryItem
      One or many.  Entry in the history log of significant events or
      actions performed by the involved parties.

   The History class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.


3.12.1  HistoryItem class

   The HistoryItem class is an entry in the History (Section 3.12) log
   that documents a particular action or event that occurred in the
   course of handling the incident.  The details of the entry are a
   free-form description, but each can be categorized with the type
   attribute.

















Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 31]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | HistoryItem      |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..1}--[ IncidentID  ]
   | ENUM type        |<>----------[ DateTime    ]
   |                  |<>--{1..*}--[ Description ]
   +------------------+

                      Figure 17: HistoryItem class

   The aggregate classes that constitute HistoryItem are:

   IncidentID
      Zero or One.  In a history log created by multiple parties, the
      IncidentID provides a mechanism to specify which CSIRT created a
      particular entry and references this organization's incident
      tracking number.  When a single organization is maintaining the
      log, this class can be ignored.

   DateTime
      One.  Timestamp of the this entry in the history log (e.g., when
      the action described in the Description was taken).

   Description
      One or many.  STRING.  A free-form textual description of the
      action or event.

   The HistoryItem class has two attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.

   type
      Optional.  ENUM.  Classifies the type of activity or event
      documented in this history log entry.  The possible values are an
      enumerated list whose default value is "other":

      1.  triaged.  The incident data was received and processed by an
          IHS.

      2.  notification.  Notification to an involved party in the
          incident was sent (e.g., a CSIRT sending a message to the
          attacking site).

      3.  shared-info.  Information about this incident was shared with
          party not directly involved.

      4.  received-info.  Additional information about the incident was



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 32]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


          received.

      5.  remediation.  The incident has been resolved; a short
          description may be included.

      6.  other.  A custom entry.


3.13  EventData class

   The EventData class describes the events of the incident surrounding
   a particular set of hosts or networks.  This description includes the
   systems from which the activity originated and those targeted, an
   assessment of the techniques used by the intruder, the impact of the
   activity on the organization, and any forensic evidence discovered.


   +------------------+
   | EventData        |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..*}--[ Description    ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ DetectTime     ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ StartTime      ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ EndTime        ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Contact        ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Assessment     ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Method         ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Flow           ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Record         ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ EventData      ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ AdditionalData ]
   +------------------+

                     Figure 18: The EventData class

   The aggregate classes that constitute EventData are:

   Description
      Zero or more.  STRING.  A free-form textual description of the
      event.

   DetectTime
      Zero or one.  The time the event was detected.

   StartTime
      Zero or one.  The time the event started.





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 33]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   EndTime
      Zero or one.  The time the event ended.

   Contact
      Zero or more.  The different parties involved in the incident

   Assessment
      Zero or one.  The impact of the incident on the target and the
      actions taken.

   Method
      Zero or more.  The methodology used by the intruders.

   Flow
      Zero or more.  A description of the systems or networks involved.

   Record
      Zero or one.  Support data (e.g., log files) that provides
      additional information about the event.

   EventData
      Zero or more.  Recursive definition of EventData allowing for the
      grouping of data

   AdditionalData
      Zero or one.  An extension mechanism for data not explicitly
      represented in the data model.

   The EventData class has one attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.


3.13.1  Relating the Incident and EventData classes

   There is substantial overlap in the Incident and EventData classes.
   Nevertheless, the semantics of these classes are quite different.
   The Incident class provides summary information about the entire
   incident, while the EventData class provides information about the
   individual events comprising the incident.  In the most common case,
   the EventData class will provide more specific information for the
   general description provided in the Incident class.  However, it may
   also be possible that the overall summarized information about the
   incident conflicts with some individual information in an EventData
   class when there is a substantial composition of various events in

   the an incident.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 34]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.13.2  Cardinality of EventData

   The EventData class can be thought of as a container for the
   properties of an event in an incident.  These properties include: the
   hosts involved, impact of the incident activity on the hosts,
   forensic logs, etc.  With an instance of the EventData class, hosts
   hosts (i.e., System class) are grouped around these common
   properties.

   The recursive definition of the EventData class (the EventData class
   is aggregated into the EventData class) provides a way to related
   information without requiring the explicit use of unique attribute
   identifiers in the classes or duplicating information.  Instead, the
   relative depth (nesting) of a class is used to group (relate)
   information.

   Nested EventData classes imply that while the child classes share the
   properties of the parent, there is some properties for which they do
   not agree.  Therefore, in order express these distinct properties,
   the nesting approach was used.  In such a scheme, a parent EventData
   class MUST always have more than one EventData child.

   For example, an EventData class might be used to describe two
   machines involved in an incident.  This description can be achieved
   using multiple instances of the System class.  It happens that there
   is a common technical contact (i.e., Contact class) for these two
   machines, but the impact (i.e., Assessment class) on them is
   different.  A depiction of the representation for this situation can
   be found in Figure 19.


   +------------------+
   | EventData        |
   +------------------+
   |                  |<>----[ Contact    ]
   |                  |
   |                  |<>----[ EventData  ]<>----[ System     ]
   |                  |      [            ]<>----[ Assessment ]
   |                  |
   |                  |<>----[ EventData  ]<>----[ System     ]
   |                  |      [            ]<>----[ Assessment ]
   +------------------+

              Figure 19: Recursion in the EventData class







Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 35]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.14  Flow class

   The Flow class groups the source and target hosts or networks in an
   event.


   +------------------+
   | Flow             |
   +------------------+
   |                  |<>--{1..*}--[ System   ]
   +------------------+

                       Figure 20: the Flow class

   The aggregate class that constitutes Flow is:

   System
      One or More.  A host or network involved in the incident activity.

   The Flow System class has no attributes.

3.15  System class

   The System class represents a computer or network involved in the
   incident.

   The systems represented by this class are categorized according to
   the role they played in the incident through the category attribute.
   The value of this category attribute dictates the semantics of the
   aggregated classes in the System class.  If the category attribute
   has a value of 'source', then the aggregated classes denote the
   machine and service from which the activity is originating.  With a
   category attribute value of 'target' or 'intermediary', then the
   machine or service is the one targeted in the activity.

















Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 36]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | System           |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>----------[ Node     ]
   | ENUM category    |<>--{0..*}--[ Service  ]
   | STRING interface |<>--{0..*}--[ Counter  ]
   | ENUM spoofed     |
   +------------------+

                      Figure 21: the System class

   The aggregate classes that constitute System are:

   Node
      One.  A host or network involved in the incident.

   Service
      Zero or more.  A network service running on the system.

   Counter
      Zero or more.  A counter with which to summarizes properties of
      this host or network.

   The System class has four attribute:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute is defined in Section 3.2.

   category
      Required.  ENUM.  Classifies the role the host or network played
      in the incident.  The possible values are:

      1.  source.  The System was the source of the attack.

      2.  target.  The System was the target of the attack.

      3.  intermediate.  The System was an intermediary in the attack.

   interface
      Optional.  STRING.  Specifies the interface on which the event(s)
      on this System originated.  If the Node class specifies a network
      rather than a host, this attribute has no meaning.

   spoofed
      Optional.  ENUM.  An indication of confidence as to whether this
      System was the true target or attacking host.  The permitted
      values for this attribute are shown below.  The default value is
      "unknown".



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 37]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


      1.  unknown.  The accuracy of the category attribute value is
          unknown

      2.  yes.  The category attribute value is probably incorrect.  In
          the case of a source, the System is likely a decoy; with a
          target, the System was likely not the intended victim.

      3.  no.  The category attribute value is believed to be correct.


3.16  Node class

   The Node class identifies a host, network device, or network.

   The base definition of the class is reused from the IDMEF
   specification, see Section 4.2.7.1 of [7].  However, the class has
   been extended by adding the NodeRole and DateTime classes.


   +---------------+
   |     Node      |
   +---------------+
   | ENUM category |<>--{0..1}--[ Location ]
   |               |<>--{0..1}--[ name     ]
   |               |<>--{0..*}--[ Address  ]
   |               |<>--{0..1}--[ DateTime ]
   |               |<>--{0..*}--[ NodeRole ]
   |               |<>--{0..*}--[ Counter  ]
   +---------------+

                       Figure 22: The Node class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Node are:

   Location
      Zero or one.  STRING.  A free-from description of the physical
      location of the equipment.

   name
      Zero or one.  STRING.  The name of the equipment (e.g., fully
      qualified domain name).  This information MUST be provided if no
      Address information is given.

   Address
      Zero or more.  The hardware, network, or application address of
      the Node.  Unless a name is provided, at least one address must be
      specified.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 38]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   DateTime
      Zero or one.  A timestamp of when the resolution between the name
      and address was performed.  This information SHOULD be provided if
      both an Address and name are given.

   NodeRole
      Zero or more.  The intended purpose of the equipment.

   Counter
      Zero or more.  A counter with which to summarizes properties of
      this host or network.

   The Node class has one attribute:

   category
      Optional.  ENUM.  The context in which the Address and name
      classes should be considered, if relevant.  The permitted values
      for this attribute are shown below.  The default value is
      "unknown".

      1.  unknown.  Domain unknown or not relevant

      2.  ads.  Windows 2000 Advanced Directory Services

      3.  afs.  Andrew File System (Transarc)

      4.  coda.  Coda Distributed File System


  5.  dfs.  Distributed File System (IBM)

      6.  dns.  Domain Name System

      7.  hosts.  Local hosts file

      8.  kerberos.  Kerberos realm

      9.  nds.  Novell Directory Services

      10.  nis.  Network Information Services (Sun)

      11.  nisplus.  Network Information Services Plus (Sun)

      12.  nt.  Windows NT domain

      13.  wfw.  Windows for Workgroups






Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 39]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


3.16.1  Counter class

   The Counter class summarize multiple occurrences of some event, or
   conveys counts on various features (e.g., packets, sessions, events).

   The value of the counter is the element content, with its units
   represented in the type attribute.  The complete semantics are
   entirely context dependant based on the class in which the Counter is
   aggregated.


   +------------------+
   | Counter          |
   +------------------+
   | INTEGER          |
   |                  |
   | ENUM type        |
   | STRING meaning   |
   +------------------+

                      Figure 23: the Counter class

   The Counter class has two attribute:

   type
      Optional.  ENUM.  Specifies the units of the element contents.

      1.  packet.  Count of packets.

      2.  session.  Count of sessions

      3.  event.  Count of events

      4.  other.  User defined count

   meaning
      Optional.  STRING.  Describes the semantics of the element content
      if the type attribute is set to other.


3.16.2  Address

   The Address class represents a hardware (layer-2), network (layer-3),
   or application (layer-7) address.

   This class was originally derived from the IDMEF specification [7].





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 40]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   |     Address      |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM category    |
   | STRING vlan-name |
   | INTEGER vlan-num |
   +------------------+

                      Figure 24: the Address class

   The Address class has four attributes:

   category
      Required.  ENUM.  The type of address represented.  The permitted
      values for this attribute are shown below.  The default value is
      "ipv4-addr".

      1.  atm.  Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)

      2.  mac.  Media Access Control (MAC) address

      3.  sna.  IBM Shared Network Architecture (SNA) address

      4.  ipv4-addr.  IPv4 host address in dotted-decimal notation
           (a.b.c.d)

      5.  ipv4-net.  IPv4 network address in dotted-decimal notation,
           slash, significant bits (a.b.c.d/nn)

      6.  ipv4-net-mask.  IPv4 network address in dotted-decimal
           notation, slash, network mask in dotted-decimal notation
           (a.b.c.d/w.x.y.z)

      7.  ipv6-addr.  IPv6 host address

      8.  ipv6-net.  IPv6 network address, slash, significant bits

      9.  ipv6-net-mask.  IPv6 network address, slash, network mask

      10.  vm.  IBM VM ("PROFS") email address

      11.  e-mail.  Electronic mail address (RFC 822)

      12.  lotus-notes.  Lotus Notes e-mail address







Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 41]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   vlan-name
      Optional.  STRING.  The name of the Virtual LAN to which the
      address belongs.

   vlan-num
      Optional.  STRING.  The number of the Virtual LAN to which the
      address belongs.


3.16.3  NodeRole class

   The NodeRole class describes (based on a pre-defined list) the
   function performed by a particular host.


         +---------------+
         | NodeRole      |
         +---------------+
         | STRING        |
         |               |
         | ENUM category |
         +---------------+

                     Figure 25: The NodeRole class

   The element content should be empty in all cases other than when the
   category attribute is set to "other".

   The NodeRole class has one attributes:

   category
      Required.  Functionality provided by a node.  If a value of
      "other" is specified, a description SHOULD be provided in the
      element content.  The default value is "other".

      1.  client.  Client computer

      2.  server-internal.  Server with internal services

      3.  server-public.  Server with public services

      4.  www.  WWW server

      5.  mail.  Mail server

      6.  messaging.  Messaging server (e.g.  NNTP, IRC, IM)

      7.  streaming.  Streaming-media server



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 42]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


      8.  voice.  Voice server (e.g.  SIP, H.323)

      9.  file.  File server (e.g.  SMB, CVS, AFS)

      10.  ftp.  FTP server

      11.  p2p.  Peer-to-peer node

      12.  name.  Name server (e.g.  DNS, WINS)

      13.  directory.  Directory server (e.g.  LDAP, finger, whois)

      14.  credential.  Credential server (e.g.  domain controller,
           Kerberos)

      15.  print.  Print server

      16.  application.  Application server

      17.  database.  Database server

      18.  infra.  Infrastructure server (e.g.  router, firewall, DHCP)

      19.  log.  Logserver

      20.  other.  other role not in this list


3.17  Process class

   The Process class describes a running program on a given host
   involved in an incident.  This class is reused outright from the
   IDMEF specification, see Section 4.2.7.3 of [7].

3.18  Service class

   The Service class describes a network service of a host or network.
   The service is identified by specific port or list of ports, along
   with the application listening on that port.

   When Service occurs as an aggregate class of a System that is a
   source, then that the service is the one from which activity of
   interest is originating.  Conversely, when Service occurs as an
   aggregate class of a System that is a target, then that service is
   the one to which activity of interest is being directed.

   This class was originally derived from the IDMEF specification, see
   Section 4.2.7.4 of [7].



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 43]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +--------------------+
   |   Service          |
   +--------------------+
   | STRING ip_version  |<>--{0..1}--[ port        ]
   | STRING ip_protocol |<>--{0..1}--[ portlist    ]
   |                    |<>--{0..1}--[ Application ]
   +--------------------+

                      Figure 26: The Service class

   The aggregate classes that constitute Service are:

   port
      Zero or one.  INTEGER.  A port number.

   portlist
      Zero or one.  PORTLIST.  A list of port numbers formatted
      according to Section 2.2.7.

   Application
      Zero or more.  The application bound to the specified port or
      portlist.

   The Service class must specify either a port or portlist.

   The Service class has two attributes:

   ip_version
      Required.  INTEGER.  The IP version number.

   ip_protocol
      Required.  INTEGER.  The IANA protocol number.


3.19  Record class

   The Record class is a container class for log and audit data that
   provides supportive information about the incident.  The source of
   this data will often be the output of monitoring tools (e.g., IDMEF
   messages generated by an IDS, connection logs from a web server) that
   were used to uncover the malicious activity.  These logs should
   provide evidence as to why a CSIRT believes an incident has occurred.









Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 44]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Da
ta Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | Record           |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{1..*}--[ RecordData ]
   +------------------+

                        Figure 27: Record class

   The aggregate class that constitutes Record is:

   RecordData
      One or more.  Log or audit data generated by a particular type of
      sensor.  Seperate instances of the RecordData class SHOULD be used
      for each sensor type.

   The Record class has one attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.


3.19.1  RecordData class

   The RecordData class groups log or audit data from a given sensor
   (e.g., IDS, firewall log) and provides a way to annotate the output.


   +------------------+
   | RecordData       |
   +------------------+
   | ENUM restriction |<>--{0..1}--[ DateTime    ]
   |                  |<>--{0..*}--[ Description ]
   |                  |<>--{0..1}--[ Analyzer    ]
   |                  |<>--{1..*}--[ RecordItem  ]
   +------------------+

                    Figure 28: The RecordData class

   The aggregate classes that constitutes RecordData is:

   DateTime
      Zero or one.  Timestamp of the RecordItem data.

   Description
      Zero or more.  STRING.  Free-form textual description of the
      provided RecordItem data.  At minimum, this description should
      convey the significance of the provided RecordItem data.




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 45]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   Analyzer
      Zero or one.  Information about the sensor used to generate the
      RecordItem data.

   RecordItem
      One or more.  Log, audit, or forensic data.

   The RecordData class has one attributes:

   restriction
      Optional.  ENUM.  This attribute has been defined in Section 3.2.


3.19.2  Analyzer class

   The Analyzer class identifies the sensor (e.g., IDS, firewall, web
   server) used to generate particular log or audit data.  The
   definition of the class is reused from the IDMEF specification, see
   Section 4.2.7.3 of [7].  However, in this context, the definition of
   an analyzer is expanded beyond merely an IDS.

3.19.3  RecordItem class

   The RecordItem class provides a way to incorporate relevant logs,
   audit trails, or forensic data to support the conclusions made during
   the course of analyzing the incident.  The class supports both the
   direct encapsulation of the data, as well as, provides primitives to
   reference data stored elsewhere.

   The dtype attribute will dictate the type of log data that will be
   found in this class.  This class is very similar to the
   AdditionalData class (Section 3.6) in that it is an extension
   mechanism that can support proprietary representations of security
   event data, not all of which is necessarily in XML.

















Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 46]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   +------------------+
   | RecordItem       |
   +------------------+
   | ANY              |
   |                  |
   | ENUM type        |
   +------------------+

                    Figure 29: The RecordItem class

   The Recorditem class has one attribute:

   type
      Required.  The type of data included in the element content.  The
      permitted values for this attribute are shown below.  The default
      value is "string".

      1.  boolean.  The element contains a boolean value, i.e., the
           strings "true" or "false"

      2.  byte.  The element content is a single 8-bit byte (see Section
           2.2.4);

      3.  character.  The element content is a single character (see
           Section 2.2.3);

      4.  date-time.  The element content is a date-time string (see
           Section 2.2.6);

      5.  integer.  The element content is an integer (see Section
           2.2.1);

      6.  portlist.  The element content is a port list (see Section
           2.2.7);

      7.  real.  The element content is a real number (see Section
           2.2.2);

      8.  string.  The element content is a string (see Section 2.2.3);

      9.  file.  The element content is a base64 encoded binary file;

      10.  path.  The element content is a filesystem path;

      11.  url.  The element content is a URL (see Section 2.2.12;)

      12.  xml.  The element content is XML-tagged data (see Section 4).




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 47]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


4.  Extending the IODEF

   In order to support the changing activity of CSIRTS, the IODEF data
   model and DTD will need to evolve along with them.  To allow new
   features to be added, both the data model and the DTD can be extended
   as described in this section.  As these extensions mature, they can
   be incorporated into future versions of the specification or
   published separately.

4.1  Extending the data model

   There are two mechanisms for extending the IODEF data model:
   inheritance and aggregation.

   o  By using inheritance, new subclasses may be derived and given
      additional attributes or operations not found in the superclass.

   o  Aggregation allows for entirely new, self-contained classes to be
      created and associated with a parent class.

   Of the two extension mechanisms, inheritance is preferred, because it
   preserves the existing data model and the operations (methods)
   executed on the classes of the model.  There are explicit guidelines
   for extending the XML DTD (see Section 4.2) which set limits on where
   extensions to the data model may be made.

4.2  Extending the XML DTD

   There are two ways to extend the IODEF XML DTD:

   1.  The AdditionalData (see Section 3.6) and RecordItem (see Section
       3.19.3) classes allow implementers to include arbitrary "atomic"
       data.  (e.g., integers, strings).  This approach SHOULD be used
       whenever possible.

   2.  The AdditionalData and RecordItem classes also allow implementers
       to extend the IODEF XML DTD with additional DTDs that describe
       arbitrarily complex data types and relationships.

   The following guidelines MUST be followed when extending the IODEF
   DTD with another DTD in the extension classes:


   1.  The IODEF description MUST include a document type declaration
       (see Section 2.1.1.3);

   2.  The document type declaration MUST define a parameter entity that
       contains the location of the extension DTD, and then reference



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 48]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


       that entity:

    <!DOCTYPE IODEF-Document SYSTEM "/path/to/IODEF-Document.dtd"
             [ <!ENTITY % x-extension SYSTEM "/path/to/extension.dtd">
                        % x-extension;  ]>


       In this example, the "x-extension" parameter entity is defined
       and then referenced, causing the DTD for the extension to be read
       by the XML parser.
       The name of the parameter entity defined for this purpose MUST be
       a string beginning with "x-"; there are no other restrictions on
       the name (other than those imposed on all entity names by XML).
       Multiple extensions may be included by defining multiple entities
       and referencing them.  For example:

    <!DOCTYPE IODEF-Document SYSTEM "/path/to/IODEF-Document.dtd"
             [ <!ENTITY % x-extension SYSTEM "/path/to/extension.dtd">
               <!ENTITY % x-another SYSTEM "/path/to/another.dtd">
                        %x-extension;
                        %x-another;  ]>

   3.  Extension DTDs MUST declare all of their elements and attribute
s
       in a separate XML namespace.  Extension DTDs MUST NOT declare any
       elements or attributes in the "IODEF" or default namespaces.

       For example, the "test" extension might be declared as follows:

   <!ELEMENT test:test ( test:a, test:b, test:c )>
   <!ATTLIST test:test
      xmlns      CDATA   #IMPLIED
      xmlns:test CDATA   #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT test:a (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST test:a
      test:attr   CDATA   #IMPLIED
   >

   <!ELEMENT test:b (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT test:c (#PCDATA)>

   4.  Extensions MUST only be included in the AdditionalData or
       RecordItem classes whose "type" attribute is "xml".  For example:








Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 49]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   <IODEF-Document version="0.0">
      <Incident ident="...">
         ...
         <AdditionalData type="xml">
           <test:test
            xmlns:test="http://www.ietf.org/iodef/test.html"
            xmlns="http://www.ietf.org/iodef/test.html">
            <test:a test:attr="...">...</test:a>
            <test:b>...</test:b>
            <test:c>...</test:c>
           </test:test>
         </AdditionalData>
      </Incident>
   </IODEF-Document>





































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 50]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


5.  Processing Considerations

   The IODEF documents MUST be well-formed, and when practical, SHOULD
   also be valid.

   It is expected that IODEF-compliant applications will normally not
   include the IODEF DTD in their communications.  Instead, the DTD will
   be referenced in the document type declaration section of the IODEF
   document (see Section 2.1.1.3).

   On occasion, an IODEF-compliant application may receive a well-
   formed, or well-formed and valid IODEF document containing tags or
   content in the tags that are not expected.  These spurious conditions
   might include:

   o  Unrecognized tags used in one of the extension classes (i.e.,
      AdditionalData or RecordItem);

   o  Unrecognized tags outside of the extension classes; or

   o  Well-formed and validate document where element or attribute
      values to not conform to the expected values identified by an
      enumerated list;

   IODEF-compliant applications MUST continue to process IODEF documents
   that contain unknown tags, provided that these documents are
   well-formed.  It is up to the individual application to decide how to
   process any content from the unknown tag.























Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 51]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


6.  Internationalization issues

   Internationalization and localization is of specific concern to the
   IODEF, since it is only through collaboration, often across language
   barriers, that certain incidents be resolved.  The IODEF supports
   this goal by depending on XML constructs, and through explicit design
   choices in the data model.

   The IODEF leverages that XML natively supports different character
   encodings.  This flexibility allows information encoded in an IODEF
   document to be in most languages.  In order to disambiguate the
   explicit language used on a per-element basis, XML provides the
   xml:lang attribute.  Using the xml:lang attribute allows the IODEF to
   make use of multiple languages in the same document.

   The intent of the data model was to provide internationalization and
   localization, but not to the detriment of inter-operability.  While
   IODEF does support different languages, the data model also relies
   heavily on standardized enumerated attributes that can crudely
   approximate the contents of the document.  With this approach, a
   CSIRT should be able to make some sense of an IODEF document it might
   receive that uses a language unfamiliar to its analysts.

   Likewise, the data model was designed so that classes where free-text
   might be used for descriptive purposes always have a one-to-many
   cardinality with its parent (i.e., Description class).  The primary
   intent of this design was to allow the same description to be
   repeated in another instance of the class but in a different
   language.  This approach allows recipients speaking different
   languages to receive the identical document, but allows the IODEF
   parser to select the appropriate language.





















Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 52]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


7.  Examples

   This section provides representative examples of incident data
   converted to an IODEF document.

7.1  Code Red detection notification

   The following email message is a typical example of an incident
   report where one host is infected with a worm.  The original report
   sent by email is presented in Figure 34, and the corresponding
   equivalent as an IODEF document is shown below.


   From e-citizen@domain.com
   Date: 13 Sep 2001 23:19:24 -0000
   To: cert-domain@domain.com
   Subject: 10.1.1.2 - Code Red Virus detected

   Automated message,
   you don't have to reply to this email.

   Your system with the IP number 10.1.1.2 seems to be infected
   with the Code Red virus.

   For more information see http://www.domain.org/react/code_redII.html

   Please fix the problem or inform a person who is responsible
   for that machine to do so.

   >From our web server logs (Port 80):
   10.1.1.2 - - [13/Sep/2001:18:11:21 +0200] "GET /default.ida?XXXXXXXXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

       Figure 34: Code Red detection notification: initial report



   <IODEF-Document version="1.0">
      <Incident restriction="need-to-know" purpose="handling">
         <IncidentID name="CERT-DOMAIN.COM">CERT-DOMAIN.COM#189</IncidentID>
         <Description>Host sending out Code Red probes</Description>
         <Assessment>
            <Impact severity="low" completion="failed" type="none"></Impact>
         </Assessment>
         <ReportTime>2001-09-13T23:19:24+00:00</ReportTime>
         <Contact role="creator" role="irt" type="organization">



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 53]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


            <name>CERT-FOR-OUR-DOMAIN.PL</name>
            <Email>cert-for-our-domain.pl@ourdomain.pl</Email>
         </Contact>
         <Contact role="tech" type="organization">
            <name>Constituency-contact for 10.1.1.2</name>
            <Email>Constituency-contact@10.1.1.2.pl</Email>
         </Contact>
         <Expectation category="investigate">
            <Description>Track and clean host</Description>
         </Expectation>
         <EventData>
             <Flow>
                <System category="source">
                   <Node>
                     <Address category="ipv4-addr">10.1.1.2</Address>
                   </Node>
                </System>
                <System category="target">
                   <Service ip_version=4" ip_protocol="6">
                     <port>80</port>
                   </Service>
                </System>
             </Flow>
             <Record>
                <RecordData>
                   <DateTime>2001-09-13T18:11:21+02:00</DateTime>
                   <Description>Web-server logs</Description>
                   <RecordItem>
   10.1.1.2 - - [13/Sep/2001:18:11:21 +0200] "GET /default.ida?XXXXXXXXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                   </RecordItem>
                </RecordData>
             </Record>
         </EventData>
         <History>
             <HistoryItem type="notification">
                  <Description>Notification sent to
                        Constituency-contact@10.1.1.2
                  </Description>
                  <DateTime>2001-09-14T08:19:01+00:00</DateTime>
               </HistoryItem>
          </History>
      </Incident>
   </IODEF-Document>





Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 54]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


       Figure 35: Code Red detection notification: CSIRT response


7.2  IODEF-Document with XML signature

7.3  IODEF-Document encrypted using XML encryption

7.4  IODEF-Document encrypted and signed using XML signature &
    encryption










































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 55]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


8.  The IODEF Document Type Definition


   <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
   <!--
    ********************************************************************
    ********************************************************************
    *** Incident Object Description Exchange Format DTD              ***
    ***               Version 01, November 2004                      ***
    ********************************************************************
    ********************************************************************
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attlist.iodef "
            version             CDATA                   #FIXED    '0.30'
         ">
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ==  Element definitions                                           ==
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    == IODEF-Document class                                           ==
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT IODEF-Document (Incident+)>
   <!ATTLIST IODEF-Document
        %attlist.iodef;
        xmlns:iodef CDATA #FIXED "urn:iana:xml:ns:iodef"
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ==  Incident class                                                ==
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Incident (IncidentID, AlternativeID?, RelatedActivity?, Description*, Contact+, ReportTime, DetectTime?, StartTime?, EndTime?, Expectation*, Method*, Assessment+, EventData*, History?, AdditionalData*)>
   <!ATTLIST Incident
        restriction %attvals.restriction; "private"
        purpose %attvals.purpose; #REQUIRED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ==  IncidentID class                                              ==
    ====================================================================
       -->
   <!ELEMENT IncidentID (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST IncidentID
        name CDATA #IMPLIED



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 56]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ==  AlternativeID class                                           ==
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT AlternativeID (IncidentID+)>
   <!ATTLIST AlternativeID
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ==  RelatedActivity class                                         ==
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT RelatedActivity (IncidentID+)>
   <!ATTLIST RelatedActivity
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  AdditionalData class                                        ===
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT AdditionalData ANY>
   <!ATTLIST AdditionalData
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
        type %attvals.dtype; #REQUIRED
        meaning CDATA #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Contact class                                               ===
    ===    - Name
    ===    - RegistryHandle
    ===    - PostalAddress
    ===    - Email
    ===    - Telephone
    ===    - Fax
    ===    - Timezone
    ===    - Contact (recursive)
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Contact (Name?, Description*, RegistryHandle*, PostalAddress?, Email*, Telephone*, Fax?, Timezone, Contact*)>
   <!ATTLIST Contact
        contactrole (creator | admin | tech | irt | cc) #REQUIRED
        contacttype (person | organization) #REQUIRED



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 57]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT RegistryHandle (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST RegistryHandle
        type %attvals.registrytype; "local"
   >
   <!ELEMENT PostalAddress (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST PostalAddress
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Email (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT Telephone (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT Fax (#PCDATA)>
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Time-based classes                                          ===
    ===    - DateTime
    ===    - ReportTime
    ===    - DetectTime
    ===    - StartTime
    ===    - EndTime
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT DateTime (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT ReportTime (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT DetectTime (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST DetectTime
   <!ELEMENT StartTime (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT EndTime (#PCDATA)>

   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  History class                                               ===
    ===    - HistoryItem
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT History (HistoryItem+)>
   <!ATTLIST History
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT HistoryItem (DateTime, IncidentID?, Description+)>
   <!ATTLIST HistoryItem
        type %attvals.historycat; #IMPLIED
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Expectation class                                           ===



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 58]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Expectation (Description+, Contact?, StartTime?, EndTime?)>
   <!ATTLIST Expectation
        priority %attvals.priority; #IMPLIED
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
        category %attvals.expectcat; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Method class                                                ===
    ===    - Classification
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Method (Classification*, Description*)>
   <!ATTLIST Method
        restriction
 %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Classification (name, url?)>
   <!ATTLIST Classification
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
        origin %attvals.origin; "other"
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Assessment class                                            ===
    ===    - Impact
    ===    - TimeImpact
    ===    - MonetaryImpact
    ===    - LifeImpact
    ===    - Confidence
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Assessment (Impact*, TimeImpact*, MonetaryImpact*, LifeImpact*, Confidence?)>
   <!ATTLIST Assessment
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Impact (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST Impact
        severity %attvals.severity; #IMPLIED
        completion %attvals.completion; #IMPLIED
        type %attvals.impacttype; "unknown"
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT TimeImpact (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST TimeImpact
        severity %attvals.severity; #IMPLIED
        unit (labor | elapsed | downtime) #REQUIRED



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 59]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


        metric (days | hours | minutes | seconds) "hours"
   >
   <!ELEMENT MonetaryImpact (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST MonetaryImpact
        severity %attvals.severity; #IMPLIED
        currency CDATA #REQUIRED
   >
   <!ELEMENT LifeImpact (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST LifeImpact
        severity %attvals.severity; #IMPLIED
        metric (deaths | injuries) #REQUIRED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Confidence EMPTY>
   <!ATTLIST Confidence
        rating %attvals.rating; #REQUIRED
   >
   <!--
   ====================================================================
   === EventData class                                              ===
   ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT EventData (Description*, DetectTime?, StartTime?, EndTime?, Contact*, Assessment?, Method*, Flow*, EventData*, Record?, AdditionalData*)>

   <!ATTLIST EventData
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Flow and System class                                       ===
    ===  Note. Represents merged Source and Target classes of IDMEF
    ===  (sections 4.2.4.3, 4.2.4.4)
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Flow (System+)>

   <!ELEMENT System (Node, Service*, Counter*)>
   <!ATTLIST System
        category %attvals.systemcat; #IMPLIED
        spoofed %attvals.spoofed; "unknown"
        interface CDATA #IMPLIED
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
   ====================================================================
   ====== Node class                                                ===
   ===      - Address
   ===      - NodeRole
   ===      - Location



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 60]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   ===      - name
   ===    Note. IODEF Node class is extended IDMEF Node class (4.2.7.1):
   ===        <!ELEMENT Node ( location?, (name | Address), Address* )>
   ====================================================================
   -->
   <!ELEMENT Node (name?, Address*, DateTime?, Location?, NodeRole*, Counter*)>
   <!ATTLIST Node
        category %attvals.nodecat; "unknown"
   >
   <!ELEMENT Address (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST Address
        category %attvals.addrcat; "ipv4-addr"
        vlan-name CDATA #IMPLIED
        vlan-num CDATA #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Location (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST Location
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT NodeRole (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST NodeRole
        category %attvals.noderolecat; "other"
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >

   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Counter class                                               ===
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Counter (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST Counter
        type (packet | session | event | other )  "other"
         meaning CDATA #IMPLIED
   >

   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Service Class                                               ===
    ===    - port
    ===    - portlist
    ===   IDMEF (4.2.7.4)
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Service ((port | portlist), Application?)>
   <!ATTLIST Service
         ip_version CDATA  "4"
         ip_protocol CDATA #REQUIRED



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 61]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   >

   <!ELEMENT port (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT portlist (#PCDATA)>

   <!ELEMENT Application (name, url?)>
   <!ATTLIST Application
         appid    CDATA    "0"
         configid CDATA "0"
         vendor_name CDATA #IMPLIED
         version CDATA  #IMPLIED
   >

   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Record class                                                ===
    ===    - RecordData
    ===    - Analyzer
    ===    - RecordItem
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Record (RecordData+)>
   <!ATTLIST Record
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT RecordData (Description*, DateTime?, Analyzer?, RecordItem+)>
   <!ATTLIST RecordData
        ident CDATA "0"
        restriction %attvals.restriction; #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--Element Analyzer of IODEF is re-used from IDMEF (4.2.4.1) -->
   <!ELEMENT Analyzer (Node?, Process?)>
   <!ATTLIST Analyzer
        analyzerid CDATA "0"
        manufacturer CDATA #IMPLIED
        model CDATA #IMPLIED
        version CDATA #IMPLIED
        class CDATA #IMPLIED
        ostype CDATA #IMPLIED
        osversion CDATA #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--Element Process of IODEF is re-used from IDMEF (4.2.7.3) -->
   <!ELEMENT Process (name, pid?, path?, arg*, env*)>
   <!ATTLIST Process
        ident CDATA "0"
   >
   <!ELEMENT env (#PCDATA)>
   <!ELEMENT pid (#PCDATA)>



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 62]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   <!ELEMENT path (#PCDATA)>

   <!ELEMENT RecordItem ANY>
   <!ATTLIST RecordItem
        dtype %attvals.dtype; #REQUIRED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    === Simple classes containing multilingual content               ===
    ===   - Description
    ===   - Contact.Name
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT Description ANY>
   <!ATTLIST Description
        preserve %attvals.preserve; #IMPLIED
        transform %attvals.transform; #IMPLIED
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT Name ANY>
   <!ATTLIST Name
        preserve %attvals.preserve; #IMPLIED
        transform %attvals.transform; #IMPLIED
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    === Miscellaneous simple classes                                 ===
    ===   - url
    ===   - name
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!ELEMENT name (#PCDATA)>
   <!ATTLIST name
        lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
   >
   <!ELEMENT url (#PCDATA)>
   <!--
    ====================================================================
    ===  Attribute list declarations.                                ===
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!--
    | Attributes of the IODEF element.  In general, the fixed value
    | of this attribute will change each time a new version of
    | the DTD is released.
    -->
   <!--



Meij
er, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 63]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


    ====================================================================
    === SECTION 2. Attribute value declarations.  Enumerated values  ===
    ===            for the many element-specific attribute lists.    ===
    ====================================================================
    -->
   <!--
    | Defines purpose of the Incident
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.purpose "
            ( handling | statistics | warning | other )
         ">
   <!--
    | Defines restriction on access to an element's content
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.restriction "
            ( default | public | need-to-know | private )
         ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Expectation.expectcat attributes
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.expectcat "
            ( nothing | contact-site | contact-me | investigate | block | other )
         ">
   <!--
    | Values for the AdditionalData.type attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.adtype "
            ( boolean | byte | character | date-time | integer |
              ntpstamp | portlist | real | string | xml )
          ">
   <!--
    | Values for the RecordItem.type attribute
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.dtype "
            ( boolean | byte | character | date-time | integer |
              ntpstamp | portlist | real | string | file | path | url |
        xml )
           ">
   <!--
    | Values for the History.type attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.historycat "
             ( triaged | notification | shared-info | received-info |
               remediation | other )
            ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Address.category attribute.
    -->



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 64]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   <!ENTITY % attvals.addrcat "
            ( atm | mac | sna |
              ipv4-addr | ipv4-net | ipv4-net-mask |
              ipv6-addr | ipv6-net | ipv6-net-mask |
              asn |
              vm | e-mail | lotus-notes )
          ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Id.type attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.idtype "
            ( current-user | original-user | target-user | user-privs |
              current-group | group-privs )
          ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Impact.completion attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.completion "
             ( failed | succeeded )
           ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Impact.type attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.impacttype "
             ( none | admin | dos | file | recon | user | unknown |
               other )
           ">
   <!--
    | Values for the RegistryHandle.type attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.registrytype "
         ( internic | apnic | arin | lacnic | ripencc | local )
       ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Confidence.rating attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.rating "
             ( low | medium | high | numeric | unknown )
           ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Impact.severity attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.severity "
             ( low | medium | high )
           ">
   <!ENTITY % attvals.priority "
             ( low | medium | high )
           ">



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 65]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


   <!--
    | Values for the Node.category attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.nodecat "
            ( unknown | ads | afs | coda | dfs | dns | hosts |
              kerberos | nds | nis | nisplus | nt | wfw )
          ">
   <!--
    | Values for the NodeRole.category attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.noderolecat "
           ( client | server-internal | server-public | www | mail |
             messaging | streaming | voice | file | ftp | p2p | name |
             directory | credential | print | application | database |
             infra | log | other )
          ">
   <!--
    | Values for the Classification.origin attribute.
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.origin "
            ( bugtraqid | cve | certcc | vendor | local | other)
         ">
   <!--
    | Values for the System.spoofed attribute
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.spoofed "
            ( unknown | yes | no )
         ">
   <!--
    | Values for the System.category attribute
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.systemcat "
        ( source | target | intermediate )
        ">
   <!--
    | Values for the MultilingText.preserve and MultilingText.transform attribute
    -->
   <!ENTITY % attvals.preserve "
        ( yes | no )
        ">
   <!ENTITY % attvals.transform "
        ( none | Base64 | QP | stringprep | zip | URI )
        ">








Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 66]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


9.  Security considerations

   Due to the sensitive nature of some of the data that might be
   represented in the IODEF, the integrity, confidentiality, and
   non-repudiation of these documents in transit SHOULD be ensured.
   Although this protection can be provided by the transport mechanism,
   applying this security to the IODEF document itself is RECOMMENDED.

   When used, the applied protective measures MUST use cryptographic
   techniques.  XML Digital Signatures [14] SHOULD be used for ensuring
   integrity and non-repudiation, while XML Encryption [15] SHOULD be
   used to ensure the confidentiality of an IODEF document.  Examples
   using signatures and encryption on an IODEF document can be found in
   Section 7:

   o  IODEF-Document with XML signature (Section 7.2)

   o  IODEF-Document encrypted using XML encryption (Section 7.3)

   o  IODEF-Document encrypted and signed using XML signature &
      encryption (Section 7.4)

   Additional information on applying XML Digital Signatures and XML
   Encryption to an IODEF document can be found in the IODEF
   Implementation Guide [18].


























Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 67]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


10.  IANA considerations


















































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 68]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


11.  Acknowledgments

   The following groups contributed substantially to this document and
   should be recognized for their efforts.

   o  the Incident Object Description and Exchange Format Working-Group
      of the TERENA task-force (TF-CSIRT)

   o  the eCSIRT.net project










































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 69]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


12.  References

12.1  Normative References

   [1]   Demchenko, Y., Hiroyuki, H. and G. Keeni, "Requirements for
         Format for Incident Report Exchange", RFC XXX, November 2004.

   [2]   World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language (XML)
         1.0 (Second Edition)", , October 2000,
         <http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006>.

   [3]   World Wide Web Consortium, "Namespaces in XML", , January 1999,
         <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/>.

   [4]   World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Stylesheet Language
         (XSL) Version 1.0", , October 2001,
         <http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl/>.

   [5]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
         Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [6]   Alvestrand, H., "Tags for the Identification of Languages", RFC
         3066, January 2001.

   [7]   Curry, D. and H. Debar, "Intrusion Detecti
on Message Exchange
         Format", RFC XXX, July 2004.

   [8]   Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform
         Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August
         1998.

   [9]   Freed, N., "IANA Charset Registration Procedures", BCP 2278,
         January 1998.

   [10]  Wahl, M., "A Summary of the X.500(96) User Schema for use with
         LDAPv3", RFC 2256, December 1997.

   [11]  Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822, April 2001.

   [12]  Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet:
         Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002.

   [13]  International Organization for Standardization, "International
         Standard: Data elements and interchange formats -  Information
         interchange - Representation of dates and times", ISO 8601,
         Second Edition, December 2000.

   [14]  Eastlake 3rd, D., Reagle, J. and D. Solo, "(Extensible Markup



Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 70]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


         Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, March
         2002.

   [15]  Imamura, T., Dillaway, B. and E. Simon, "XML Encryption Syntax
         and Processing, W3C Recommendation", December 2002,
         <http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xmlenc-core-20021210/>.

   [16]  International Organization for Standardization, "International
         Standard: Codes for the representation of currencies and funds,
         ISO 4217:2001", ISO 4217:2001, August 2001.

12.2  Informative References

   [17]  Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I. and G. Booch, "The Unified Modeling
         Language Reference Model, ISBN 020130998X, Addison-Wesley",
         1998.

   [18]  Danyliw, R., "The IODEF Implementation Guide", RFC XXX, 2003.


Authors' Addresses

   Jan Meijer
   SURFnet bv
   P.O. Box 19035
   Utrecht  NL-3501 DA
   Netherlands
   Phone: +31 302 305 305
   EMail: jan.meijer@surfnet.nl


   Roman Danyliw
   CERT Coordination Center
   4500 Fifth Ave.
   Pittsburgh, PA  15213
   USA
   Phone: +1 412 268 7090
   EMail: rdd@cert.org


   Yuri Demchenko
   NLnet Labs
   Netherlands
   EMail: demch@chello.nl




Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 71]

Internet-Draft    IODEF Data Model and Implementation      November 2004


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE REPRESENTS
   THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM
   ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY
   WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE
   ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
   FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.






































Meijer, et al.            Expires May 10, 2005                 [Page 72]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/