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

Versions: (draft-takahashi-mile-sci) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 RFC 7203

MILE Working Group                                          T. Takahashi
Internet-Draft                                                      NICT
Intended status: Standards Track                            K. Landfield
Expires: August 4, 2012                                           McAfee
                                                               T. Millar
                                                                  USCERT
                                                          Y. Kadobayashi
                                                                   NAIST
                                                             Feb 1, 2012


    IODEF-extension to support structured cybersecurity information
                       draft-ietf-mile-sci-02.txt

Abstract

   This document extends the Incident Object Description Exchange Format
   (IODEF) defined in RFC 5070 [RFC5070] to facilitate enriched
   cybersecurity information exchange among cybersecurity entities by
   embedding structured information formatted by specifications,
   including CAPEC[TM] [CAPEC], CEE[TM] [CEE], CPE[TM] [CPE], CVE(R)
   [CVE], CVRF [CVRF], CVSS [CVSS], CWE[TM] [CWE], CWSS[TM] [CWSS], OCIL
   [OCIL], OVAL(R) [OVAL], and XCCDF [XCCDF].

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 4, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.












































Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Applicability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Extension Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     4.1.  List of Supported Structured Cybersecurity Information
           Specifictions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       4.1.1.  CAPEC 1.6  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.2.  CCE 5.0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.3.  CCSS 1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.4.  CEE 0.6  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.5.  CPE 2.3 Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.6.  CPE 2.3 Dictionary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.7.  CVE 1.0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.8.  CVRF 1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.9.  CVSS 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.10. CWE 5.0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.11. CWSS 0.8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.12. MAEC 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.13. OCIL 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.14. OVAL 5.10.1 Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.15. OVAL 5.10.1 Results  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.16. OVAL 5.10.1 Common . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.17. XCCDF 1.2  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2.  Extended Data Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.2.1.  XMLDATA  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.3.  Extended Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.3.1.  AttackPattern  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       4.3.2.  Platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       4.3.3.  Vulnerability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       4.3.4.  Scoring  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
       4.3.5.  Weakness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       4.3.6.  EventReport  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
       4.3.7.  Verifcation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
       4.3.8.  Remediation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     5.1.  Transport-Specific Concerns  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   7.  Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   8.  Appendix I: XML Schema Definition for Extension  . . . . . . . 24
   9.  Appendix II: XML Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
     10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
     10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34





Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


1.  Introduction

   Cyber attacks are getting more sophisticated, and their numbers are
   increasing day by day.  To cope with such situation, incident
   information needs to be reported, exchanged, and shared among
   organizations.  IODEF is one of the tools enabling such exchange, and
   is already in use.

   To efficiently run cybersecurity operations, these exchanged
   information needs to be machine-readable.  IODEF provides a
   structured means to describe the information, but it needs to embed
   various non-structured such information in order to convey detailed
   information.  Further structure within IODEF increases IODEF
   documents' machine-readability and thus facilitates streamlining
   cybersecurity operations.

   On the other hand, there exist various other activities facilitating
   detailed and structured description of cybersecurity information,
   major of which includes CAPEC [CAPEC], CEE [CEE], CPE [CPE], CVE
   [CVE], CVRF [CVRF], CVSS [CVSS], CWE [CWE], CWSS [CWSS], OCIL [OCIL],
   OVAL [OVAL], and XCCDF [XCCDF].  Since such structured description
   facilitates cybersecurity operations, it would be beneficial to embed
   and convey these information inside IODEF document.

   To enable that, this document extends the IODEF to embed and convey
   various structured cybersecurity information, with which
   cybersecurity operations can be facilitated.  Since IODEF defines a
   flexible and extensible format and supports a granular level of
   specificity, this document defines an extension to IODEF instead of
   defining a new report format.  For clarity, and to eliminate
   duplication, only the additional structures necessary for describing
   the exchange of such structured information are provided.


2.  Terminology

   The terminology used in this document follows the one defined in RFC
   5070 [RFC5070].

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


3.  Applicability

   To maintain cybersecurity, organization needs to exchange
   cybersecurity information, which includes the following information:



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   attack pattern, platform information, vulnerability and weakness,
   countermeasure instruction, computer event log, and the severity.

   IODEF provides a scheme to exchange such information among interested
   parties.  However, the detailed common format to describe such
   information is not defined in the IODEF base document.

   On the other hand, to describe those information and to facilitate
   exchange, a structured format for that is already available.  Major
   of them are CAPEC, CEE, CPE, CVE, CVRF, CVSS, CWE, CWSS, OCIL, OVAL,
   and XCCDF.  By embedding them into the IODEF document, the document
   can convey more detailed contents to the receivers, and the document
   can be easily reused.  Note that interactive communication is needed
   in some cases, and some of these structured information, e.g., OCIL
   information, solicits reply from recipients.  These reply could be
   also embedded inside the IODEF document.

   These structured cybersecurity information facilitates cybersecurity
   operation at the receiver side.  Since the information is machine-
   readable, the data can be processed by computers.  That expedites the
   automation of cybersecurity operations

   For instance, an organization wishing to report a security incident
   wants to describe what vulnerability was exploited.  Then the sender
   can simply use IODEF, where an CAPEC record is embedded instead of
   describing everything in free format text.  Receiver can also
   identify the needed details of the attack pattern by looking up some
   of the xml [XML1.0] tags defined by CAPEC.  Receiver can accumulate
   the attack pattern information (CAPEC record) in its database and
   could distribute it to the interested parties if needed, without
   needing human interventions.


4.  Extension Definition

   This draft extends IODEF to embed structured cybersecurity
   information by introducing new classes, with which these information
   can be embedded inside IODEF document as element contents of
   AdditionalData and RecordItem classes.

4.1.  List of Supported Structured Cybersecurity Information
      Specifictions

   This extension embeds structured cybersecurity information from
   external specifications.  The initial list of supported
   specifications is listed below.  Each entry has namespace [XMLNames],
   specification name, version, specification URI and applicable classes
   for each specification.  Future assignments are to be managed by IANA



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   using the Expert Review [RFC5226] and Specification Required
   [RFC5226] allocation policies as further specified in Section 6.

4.1.1.  CAPEC 1.6

  Namespace:          http://capec.mitre.org/observables
  Specification Name: Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification
  Version:            1.6
  Specification URI:  http://capec.mitre.org/
  Applicable Classes: AttackPattern

4.1.2.  CCE 5.0

     Namespace:          http://cce.mitre.org
     Specification Name: Common Configuration Enumeration
     Version:            5.0
     Specification URI:  http://cce.mitre.org/
     Applicable Classes: Verification

4.1.3.  CCSS 1.0

     Namespace:          N/A
     Specification Name: Common Configuration Scoring System
     Version:            1.0
     Specification URI:  TBD
     Applicable Classes: Scoring

4.1.4.  CEE 0.6

     Namespace:          http://cee.mitre.org
     Specification Name: Common Event Expression
     Version:            0.6
     Specification URI:  http://cee.mitre.org/
     Applicable Classes: EventReport

4.1.5.  CPE 2.3 Language

     Namespace:          http://cpe.mitre.org/language/2.0
     Specification Name: Common Platform Enumeration Reference
     Version:            2.3
     Specification URI:  http://scap.nist.gov/specifications/cpe/
     Applicable Classes: Platform









Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


4.1.6.  CPE 2.3 Dictionary

     Namespace:          http://cpe.mitre.org/dictionary/2.0
     Specification Name: Common Platform Enumeration Dictionary
     Version:            2.3
     Specification URI:  http://scap.nist.gov/specifications/cpe/
     Applicable Classes: Platform

4.1.7.  CVE 1.0

     Namespace:          http://cve.mitre.org/cve/downloads/1.0
     Specification Name: Common Vulnerability and Exposures
     Version:            1.0
     Specification URI:  http://cve.mitre.org/
     Applicable Classes: Vulnerability

4.1.8.  CVRF 1.0

     Namespace:          http://www.icasi.org/CVRF/schema/cvrf/1.0
     Specification Name: Common Vulnerability Reporting Format
     Version:            1.0
     Specification URI:  http://www.icasi.org/cvrf
     Applicable Classes: Vulnerability

4.1.9.  CVSS 2.0

     Namespace:          http://scap.nist.gov/schema/cvss-v2/1.0
     Specification Name: Common Vulnerability Scoring System
     Version:            2
     Specification URI:  http://www.first.org/cvss
     Applicable Classes: Scoring

4.1.10.  CWE 5.0

     Namespace:          N/A
     Specification Name: Common Weakness Enumeration
     Version:            5.1
     Specification URI:  http://cwe.mitre.org/
     Applicable Classes: Weakness

4.1.11.  CWSS 0.8

     Namespace:          N/A
     Specification Name: Common Weakness Scoring System
     Version:            0.8
     Specification URI:  http://cwe.mitre.org/cwss/
     Applicable Classes: Scoring




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


4.1.12.  MAEC 2.0

  Namespace:          http://maec.mitre.org/XMLSchema/maec-core-2
  Specification Name: Malware Attribute Enumeration and Characterization
  Version:            2.0
  Specification URI:  http://maec.mitre.org/
  Applicable Classes: EventReport, AttackPattern

4.1.13.  OCIL 2.0

     Namespace:          http://scap.nist.gov/schema/ocil/2.0
     Specification Name: Open Checklist Interactive Language
     Version:            2.0
     Specification URI:  http://scap.nist.gov/specifications/ocil/
     Applicable Classes: Verification

4.1.14.  OVAL 5.10.1 Definitions

    Namespace:          http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5
    Specification Name: Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language
    Version:            5.10.1
    Specification URI:  http://oval.mitre.org/
    Applicable Classes: Verification

4.1.15.  OVAL 5.10.1 Results

     Namespace:          http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-results-5
     Specification Name: Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language
     Version:            5.10.1
     Specification URI:  TBD
     Applicable Classes: Verification

4.1.16.  OVAL 5.10.1 Common

     Namespace:          http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-common-5
     Specification Name: Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language
     Version:            5.10.1
     Specification URI:  TBD
     Applicable Classes: Verification

4.1.17.  XCCDF 1.2

  Namespace:          http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2
  Specification Name: Extensible Configuration Checklist Description Format
  Version:            1.2
  Specification URI:  http://scap.nist.gov/specifications/xccdf/
  Applicable Classes: Verification




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


4.2.  Extended Data Types

   This extension inherits all of the data types defined in the IODEF
   model.  One data type is added: XMLDATA.

4.2.1.  XMLDATA

   An embedded XML data is represented by the XMLDATA data type.  This
   type is defined as the extension to the iodef:ExtensionType
   [RFC5070], whose dtype attribute is set to "xml."

4.3.  Extended Classes

   The IODEF Incident element [RFC5070] is summarized below.  It is
   expressed in Unified Modeling Language (UML) syntax as used in the
   IODEF specification.  The UML representation is for illustrative
   purposes only; elements are specified in XML as defined in Appendix
   A.

































Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


  +--------------------+
  | Incident           |
  +--------------------+
  | ENUM purpose       |<>---------[IncidentID]
  | STRING ext-purpose |<>--{0..1}-[AlternativeID]
  | ENUM lang          |<>--{0..1}-[RelatedActivity]
  | ENUM restriction   |<>--{0..1}-[DetectTime]
  |                    |<>--{0..1}-[StartTime]
  |                    |<>--{0..1}-[EndTime]
  |                    |<>---------[ReportTime]
  |                    |<>--{0..*}-[Description]
  |                    |<>--{1..*}-[Assessment]
  |                    |<>--{0..*}-[Method]
  |                    |            |<>--[AdditionalData]
  |                    |                  |<>--[AttackPattern]
  |                    |                  |<>--[Vulnerability]
  |                    |                  |<>--[Weakness]
  |                    |<>--{1..*}-[Contact]
  |                    |<>--{0..*}-[EventData]
  |                    |            |<>--[Flow]
  |                    |            |     |<>--[System]
  |                    |            |           |<>--[AdditionalData]
  |                    |            |                 |<>--[Platform]
  |                    |            |<>--[Expectation]
  |                    |            |<>--[Record]
  |                    |                  |<>--[RecordData]
  |                    |                        |<>--[RecordItem]
  |                    |                              |<>--[EventReport]
  |                    |<>--{0..1}-[History]
  |                    |<>--{0..*}-[AdditionalData]
  |                    |            |<>--[Verification]
  |                    |            |<>--[Remediation]
  +--------------------+

                         Figure 1: Incident class

   This extension defines the following seven elements.

4.3.1.  AttackPattern

   An AttackPattern consists of an extension to the
   Incident.Method.AdditionalData element with a dtype of "xml".  The
   extension describes attack patterns of incidents or events.

   It is recommended that Method class SHOULD contain one or more of the
   extension elements whenever available.

   An AttackPattern class is structured as follows.



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   +------------------------+
   | AttackPattern          |
   +------------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID   |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING AttackPatternID |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   |                        |<>--(0..*)-[ Platform ]
   +------------------------+

                       Figure 2: AttackPattern class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   AttackPatternID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of an attack
      pattern to be reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used whenever
      such identifier is available, but could be omitted if no such one
      is available.  In this case, either RawData or Reference elements,
      or both of them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or Reference
      element is provided along with this attribute, writers/senders
      MUST ensure that this value is consistent with the one provided by
      the element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it
      SHOULD prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the
      inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

   The AttackPattern class is composed of the following aggregate
   classes.

   RawData:  Zero or more.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or more of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.





Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   Platform:  Zero or more.  An identifier of software platform involved
      in the specific attack pattern, which is elaborated in
      Section 4.3.2.  Some of the structured information embedded in the
      RawData element may include the identifier within it.  In this
      case, this Platform element SHOULD NOT be used.  If a reader/
      receiver detects the identifiers in both RawData and Platform
      elements and their inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the identifiers
      derived from the Platform element, and SHOULD log the
      inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

4.3.2.  Platform

   A Platform identifies a software platform.  It is recommended that
   AttackPattern, Vulnerability, Weakness, and System classes contain
   this elements whenever available.

   A Platform element is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | Platform             |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING PlatformID    |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   +----------------------+

                         Figure 3: Platform class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   PlatformID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of a platform to be
      reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used whenever such identifier
      is available, but could be omitted if no such one is available.
      In this case, either RawData or Reference elements, or both of
      them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of the following aggregate classes.

   RawData:  Zero or more.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or more of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   Writers/senders MUST ensure the specification name and version
   identified by the SpecificationID are consistent with the contents of
   the ID; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
   prefer the specification name and version derived from the content,
   and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

4.3.3.  Vulnerability

   A Vulnerability consists of an extension to the
   Incident.Method.AdditionalData element with a dtype of "xml".  The
   extension describes the (candidate) vulnerabilities of incidents or
   events.

   It is recommended that Method class SHOULD contain one or more of the
   extension elements whenever available.

   A Vulnerability element is structured as follows.

   +------------------------+
   | Vulnerability          |
   +------------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID   |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING VulnerabilityID |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   |                        |<>--(0..*)-[ Platform ]
   |                        |<>--(0..*)-[ Scoring ]
   +------------------------+

                       Figure 4: Vulnerability class

   This class has the following attributes.






Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   VulnerabilityID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of a
      vulnerability to be reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used
      whenever such identifier is available, but could be omitted if no
      such one is available.  In this case, either RawData or Reference
      elements, or both of them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or
      Reference element is provided along with this attribute, writers/
      senders MUST ensure that this value is consistent with the one
      provided by the element; if a reader/receiver detects an
      inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD
      log the inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of the following aggregate classes.

   RawData:  Zero or one.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or one of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   Platform:  Zero or more.  An identifier of software platform affected
      by the vulnerability, which is elaborated in Section 4.3.2.  Some
      of the structured information embedded in the RawData element may
      include the identifier within it.  In this case, this element
      SHOULD NOT be used.  If a reader/receiver detects the identifiers
      in both RawData and Platform elements and their inconsistency, it
      SHOULD prefer the identifiers derived from the Platform element,
      and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can correct the
      problem.

   Scoring:  Zero or more.  An indicator of the severity of the
      vulnerability, such as CVSS and CCSS scores, which is elaborated
      in Section 4.3.4.  Some of the structured information may include
      scores within it.  In this case, the Scoring element SHOULD NOT be



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


      used since the RawData element contains the scores.  If a reader/
      receiver detects scores in both RawData and Scoring elements and
      their inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the scores derived from the
      RawData element, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can
      correct the problem.

4.3.4.  Scoring

   A Scoring class describes the scores of the severity in terms of
   security.  It is recommended that Vulnerability and Weakness classes
   contain the elements whenever available.

   A Scoring class is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | Scoring              |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>---------[ ScoreSet ]
   +----------------------+

                          Figure 5: Scoring class

   This class has two attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this namespace is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer the value of this attribute, and SHOULD log the
      inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of an aggregate class.

   ScoreSet:  One. XMLDATA.  A complete document that is formatted
      according to the specification and its version identified by the
      value of the SpecificationID with the Section 4.1.  This element
      includes a set of score information.

   Writers/senders MUST ensure the specification name and version
   identified by the SpecificationID are consistent with the contents of
   the Score; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
   prefer the specification name and version derived from the content,
   and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


4.3.5.  Weakness

   A Weakness consists of an extension to the
   Incident.Method.AdditionalData element with a dtype of "xml".  The
   extension describes the weakness types of incidents or events.

   It is recommended that Method class SHOULD contain one or more of the
   extension elements whenever available.

   A Weakness element is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | Weakness             |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING WeaknessID    |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   |                      |<>--(0..*)-[ Platform ]
   |                      |<>--(0..*)-[ Scoring ]
   +----------------------+

                         Figure 6: Weakness class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   WeaknessID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of a weakness to be
      reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used whenever such identifier
      is available, but could be omitted if no such one is available.
      In this case, either RawData or Reference elements, or both of
      them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of the following aggregate classes.




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   RawData:  Zero or more.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or one of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   Platform:  Zero or more.  An identifier of software platform affected
      by the weakness, which is elaborated in Section 4.3.2.  Some of
      the structured information embedded in the RawData element may
      include the identifier within it.  In this case, this element
      SHOULD NOT be used.  If a reader/receiver detects the identifiers
      in both RawData and Platform elements and their inconsistency, it
      SHOULD prefer the identifiers derived from the Platform element,
      and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can correct the
      problem.

   Scoring:  Zero or more.  An indicator of the severity of the
      weakness, such as CWSS score, which is elaborated in
      Section 4.3.4.  Some of the structured information may include
      scores within it.  In this case, the Scoring element SHOULD NOT be
      used since the RawData element contains the scores.  If a reader/
      receiver detects scores in both RawData and Scoring elements and
      their inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the scores derived from the
      RawData element, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human can
      correct the problem.

4.3.6.  EventReport

   An EventReport consists of an extension to the
   Incident.EventData.Record.RecordData.RecordItem element with a dtype
   of "xml".  The extension embeds structured event reports.

   It is recommended that RecordItem class SHOULD contain one or more of
   the extension elements whenever available.

   An EventReport element is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | EventReport          |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING EventID       |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   +----------------------+




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


                        Figure 7: EventReport class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   EventID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of an event to be
      reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used whenever such identifier
      is available, but could be omitted if no such one is available.
      In this case, either RawData or Reference elements, or both of
      them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of three aggregate classes.

   RawData:  Zero or one.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or one of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   This class MUST contain at least one of RawData or Reference
   elements.  Writers/senders MUST ensure the specification name and
   version identified by the SpecificationID are consistent with the
   contents of the RawData; if a reader/receiver detects an
   inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the specification name and version
   derived from the content, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human
   can correct the problem.






Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


4.3.7.  Verifcation

   A Verification consists of an extension to the
   Incident.AdditionalData element with a dtype of "xml".  The extension
   elements describes incident on vefifying incidents.

   A Verification class is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | Verification         |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | STRING VerificationID|<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   +----------------------+

                       Figure 8: Verification class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.

   VerificationID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of an check item
      to be reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used whenever such
      identifier is available, but could be omitted if no such one is
      available.  In this case, either RawData or Reference elements, or
      both of them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or Reference
      element is provided along with this attribute, writers/senders
      MUST ensure that this value is consistent with the one provided by
      the element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it
      SHOULD prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the
      inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of two aggregate classes.

   RawData:  Zero or one.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.




Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   Reference:  Zero or one of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   This class MUST contain at least either of RawData and Reference
   elements.  Writers/senders MUST ensure the specification name and
   version identified by the SpecificationID are consistent with the
   contents of the RawData; if a reader/receiver detects an
   inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the specification name and version
   derived from the content, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human
   can correct the problem.

4.3.8.  Remediation

   A Remediation consists of an extension to the Incident.AdditionalData
   element with a dtype of "xml".  The extension elements describes
   incident remediation information including instructions.

   It is recommended that Incident class SHOULD contain one or more of
   this extension elements whenever available.

   A Remediation class is structured as follows.

   +----------------------+
   | Remediation          |
   +----------------------+
   | ENUM SpecificationID |<>--(0..*)-[ RawData ]
   | String RemediationID |<>--(0..*)-[ Reference ]
   +----------------------+

                        Figure 9: Remediation class

   This class has the following attributes.

   SpecificationID:  REQUIRED.  ENUM.  The identifier of the
      specification specifying the format of the RawData element.  The
      value should be chosen from the namespaces [XMLNames] listed in
      Section 4.1.  Note that the lists in Section 4.1 will be developed
      further by IANA.  In case a RawData or Reference element is
      provided along with this attribute, writers/senders MUST ensure
      that this value is consistent with the one provided by the
      element; if a reader/receiver detects an inconsistency, it SHOULD
      prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so
      a human can correct the problem.






Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   RemediationID:  OPTIONAL.  STRING.  An identifier of a remediation
      information to be reported.  This attribute SHOULD be used
      whenever such identifier is available, but could be omitted if no
      such one is available.  In this case, either RawData or Reference
      elements, or both of them, MUST be provided.  In case a RawData or
      Reference element is provided along with this attribute, writers/
      senders MUST ensure that this value is consistent with the one
      provided by the element; if a reader/receiver detects an
      inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer this attribute's value, and SHOULD
      log the inconsistency so a human can correct the problem.

   This class is composed of two aggregate classes.

   RawData:  Zero or one.  XMLDATA.  A complete document that is
      formatted according to the specification and its version
      identified by the value of the SpecificationID with the
      Section 4.1.

   Reference:  Zero or one of iodef:Reference [RFC5070].  This element
      allows an IODEF document to include a link to a structured
      information instead of directly embedding it into a RawData
      element.

   This class MUST contain at least either of RawData and Reference
   elements.  Writers/senders MUST ensure the specification name and
   version identified by the SpecificationID are consistent with the
   contents of the RawData; if a reader/receiver detects an
   inconsistency, it SHOULD prefer the specification name and version
   derived from the content, and SHOULD log the inconsistency so a human
   can correct the problem.


5.  Security Considerations

   This document specifies a format for encoding a particular class of
   security incidents appropriate for exchange across organizations.  As
   merely a data representation, it does not directly introduce security
   issues.  However, it is guaranteed that parties exchanging instances
   of this specification will have certain concerns.  For this reason,
   the underlying message format and transport protocol used MUST ensure
   the appropriate degree of confidentiality, integrity, and
   authenticity for the specific environment.

   Organizations that exchange data using this document are URGED to
   develop operating procedures that document the following areas of
   concern.





Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


5.1.  Transport-Specific Concerns

   The underlying messaging format and protocol used to exchange
   instances of the IODEF MUST provide appropriate guarantees of
   confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity.  The use of a
   standardized security protocol is encouraged.  The Real-time Inter-
   network Defense (RID) protocol [RFC6045] and its associated transport
   binding [RFC6046] provide such security.

   The critical security concerns are that these structured information
   may be falsified or they may become corrupt during transit.  In areas
   where transmission security or secrecy is questionable, the
   application of a digital signature and/or message encryption on each
   report will counteract both of these concerns.  We expect that each
   exchanging organization will determine the need, and mechanism, for
   transport protection.


6.  IANA Considerations

   This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML
   schemata[XMLschemaPart1][XMLschemaPart2] conforming to a registry
   mechanism described in [RFC3688].

   Registration request for the IODEF structured cybersecurity
   information extension namespace:

      URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-sci-1.0

      Registrant Contact: Refer here to the authors' addresses section
      of the document.

      XML: None

   Registration request for the IODEF structured cybersecurity
   information extension XML schema:

      URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:iodef-sci-1.0

      Registrant Contact: Refer here to the authors' addresses section
      of the document.

      XML: Refer here to the XML Schema in the appendix of the document.

   This memo creates the following registry for IANA to manage:






Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


      Name of the registry: "IODEF Structured Cyber Security Information
      Specifications"

      Namespace details: A registry entry for a Structured Cyber
      Security Information Specification (SCI specification) consists
      of:

         Namespace: A URI [RFC3986] that is the XML namespace name used
         by the registered SCI specification.

         Specification Name: A string containing the spelled-out name of
         the SCI specification in human-readable form.

         Specification URI: A list of one or more of the URIs [RFC3986]
         from which the registered specification can be obtained.  The
         registered specification MUST be readily and publicly available
         from that URI.

         Applicable Classes: A list of one or more of the Extended
         Classes specified in Section 4.3 of this document.  The
         registered SCI specification MUST only be used with the
         Extended Classes in the registry entry.

      Information that must be provided to assign a new value: The above
      list of information.

      Fields to record in the registry: Namespace/Specification Name/
      Version/Applicable Classes.

      Initial registry contents: See sections from Section 4.1.1 through
      Section 4.1.17 above.

      Allocation Policy: Expert Review [RFC5226] and Specification
      Required [RFC5226].

   The Designated Expert is expected to consult with the mile (Managed
   Incident Lightweight Exchange) working group or its successor if any
   such WG exists (e.g., via email to the working group's mailing list).
   The Designated Expert is expected to retrieve the SCI specification
   from the provided URI in order to check the public availability of
   the specification and verify the correctness of the URI.  An
   important responsibility of the Designated Expert is to ensure that
   the registered Applicable Classes are appropriate for the registered
   SCI specification.







Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


7.  Acknowledgment

   We would like to acknowledge Mr. David Black from EMC, who kindly
   provided generous support, especially on the IANA registry issues.
   We also would like to thank Paul Cichonski from NIST, Robert Martin
   from MITRE, Kathleen Moriarty from EMC, Lagadec Philippe from NATO,
   Shuhei Yamaguchi from NICT, Anthony Rutkowski from Yaana Technology,
   and Brian Trammel from CERT/NetSA for their sincere discussion and
   feedback on this document.


8.  Appendix I: XML Schema Definition for Extension

   The XML Schema describing the elements defined in the Extension
   Definition section is given here.  Each of the examples in Section 9
   should be verified to validate against this schema by automated
   tools.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<xsd:schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-sci-1.0"
 xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
 xmlns:iodef="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
 xmlns:iodef-sci="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-sci-1.0"
 elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">

<xsd:import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
 schemaLocation="iodef_schema.xsd"/>

<!--
 schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:iodef-1.0"/>
-->

<!--================================================================
== XMLDATA                                                        ==
==================================================================-->

<xsd:complexType name="XMLDATA">
  <xsd:complexContent>
    <xsd:restriction base="iodef:ExtensionType">
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
         maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="dtype" type="iodef:dtype-type"
       use="prohibited" value="xml"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="ext-dtype" type="xsd:string" use="optional"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="meaning" type="xsd:string"/>



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 24]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


      <xsd:attribute name="formatid" type="xsd:string"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="restriction" type="iodef:restriction-type"/>
    </xsd:restriction>
  </xsd:complexContent>
</xsd:complexType>


<!--================================================================
== Scoring Class                                                  ==
==================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Scoring">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:element name="ScoreSet" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--================================================================
== AttackPattern Class                                            ==
==================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="AttackPattern">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Platform" ref="iodef-sci:Platform"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="AttackPatternID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--================================================================
== Vulnerability Class                                            ==
==================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Vulnerability">



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 25]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Platform" ref="iodef-sci:Platform"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Scoring" ref="iodef-sci:Scoring"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="VulnerabilityID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--=================================================================
== Weakness Class                                                  ==
==================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Weakness">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Platform" ref="iodef-sci:Platform"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Scoring" ref="iodef-sci:Scoring"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="WeaknessID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--=================================================================
== Platform Class                                                ==
==================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Platform">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 26]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


        <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"
         minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="PlatformID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--================================================================
== EventReport Class                                              ==
=================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="EventReport">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:choice>
          <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"/>
          <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"/>
        </xsd:choice>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="EventID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

<!--================================================================
== Verification Class                                             ==
=================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Verification">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:choice>
          <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"/>
          <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"/>
        </xsd:choice>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="VerificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 27]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


  </xsd:element>

<!--================================================================
== Remediation Class                                              ==
=================================================================-->

  <xsd:element name="Remediation">
    <xsd:complexType>
      <xsd:sequence>
        <xsd:choice>
          <xsd:element name="RawData" type="iodef-sci:XMLDATA"/>
          <xsd:element name="Reference" ref="iodef:Reference"/>
        </xsd:choice>
      </xsd:sequence>
      <xsd:attribute name="SpecificationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="required"/>
      <xsd:attribute name="RemediationID" type="xsd:string"
       use="optional"/>
    </xsd:complexType>
  </xsd:element>

</xsd:schema>


9.  Appendix II: XML Examples

   This section provides an example of an incident encoded in the IODEF.
   This do not necessarily represent the only way to encode a particular
   incident.  Below is an example of a CSIRT reporting an attack.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<IODEF-Document version="1.00" lang="en"
 xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
 xmlns:iodef="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
 xmlns:iodef-sci="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-sci-1.0"
 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
  <Incident purpose="reporting">
    <IncidentID name="csirt.example.com">189493</IncidentID>
    <ReportTime>2001-09-13T23:19:24+00:00</ReportTime>
    <Description>Incident report in company xx</Description>
    <Assessment>
      <Impact completion="failed" type="admin"/>
    </Assessment>
    <Method>
      <Description>Structured information on attack pattern, exploited
       vulnerability, and weakness</Description>
      <AdditionalData dtype="xml">
        <iodef-sci:AttackPattern SpecificationID="CAPEC_1.6"



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 28]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


         AttackPatternID="CAPEC-14">
          <iodef-sci:RawData>
            <Attack_Pattern_Catalog Catalog_Name="CAPEC"
             Catalog_Version="1.6" Catalog_Date="2010-12-09"
             xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
             xmlns:observables="http://capec.mitre.org/observables"
             xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation=
             "http://capec.mitre.org/data/xsd/ap_schema_v2.1.xsd">
              <Views>.....</Views>
            </Attack_Pattern_Catalog>
          </iodef-sci:RawData>
          <Reference>
            <ReferenceName>Link to Capec-14</ReferenceName>
            <URL>http://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/14.html</URL>
          </Reference>
        </iodef-sci:AttackPattern>
        <iodef-sci:Vulnerability SpecificationID="CVE_1.0"
         VulnerabilityID="CVE-2010-3654">
          <iodef-sci:RawData>
            <cve xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation=
               "http://cve.mitre.org/schema/cve/cve_1.0.xsd"
             xmlns="http://cve.mitre.org/cve/downloads"
             xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
              <item seq="1999-0002" name="CVE-1999-0002" type="CVE">
              ...
              </item>
            </cve>
          </iodef-sci:RawData>
          <iodef-sci:Platform SpecificationID="CPE_2.3"
           PlatformID="[CPE ID]"/>
          <iodef-sci:Scoring SpecificationID="CVSS_2.0">
            <iodef-sci:ScoreSet>
              <base_metrics>
                <score>9.3</score>
                <access-vector>NETWORK</access-vector>
                <access-complexity>MEDIUM</access-complexity>
                <authentication>NONE</authentication>
                <confidentiality-impact>COMPLETE</confidentiality-impact>
                <integrity-impact>COMPLETE</integrity-impact>
                <availability-impact>COMPLETE</availability-impact>
                <source>http://nvd.nist.gov</source>
                <generated-on-datetime>2012-01-11T09:55:00.000-05:00
                </generated-on-datetime>
              </base_metrics>
            </iodef-sci:ScoreSet>
          </iodef-sci:Scoring>
        </iodef-sci:Vulnerability>
        <iodef-sci:Weakness SpecificationID="CWE_5.0"



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 29]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


         WeaknessID="CWE-119">
          <iodef-sci:RawData>
            <Weakness_Catalog
             xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
             Catalog_Name="VIEW LIST: CWE-1000: Research Concepts"
             Catalog_Version="2.1" Catalog_Date="2011-09-13"
             xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation=
             "http://cwe.mitre.org/data/xsd/cwe_schema_v5.1.xsd">
               <Views>.....</Views>
            </Weakness_Catalog>
          </iodef-sci:RawData>
        </iodef-sci:Weakness>
      </AdditionalData>
    </Method>
    <Contact role="creator" type="organization">
      <ContactName>Example.com CSIRT</ContactName>
      <RegistryHandle registry="arin">example-com</RegistryHandle>
      <Email>contact@csirt.example.com</Email>
    </Contact>
    <EventData>
      <Flow>
        <System category="source">
          <Node>
            <Address category="ipv4-addr">192.0.2.200</Address>
            <Counter type="event">57</Counter>
          </Node>
        </System>
        <System category="target">
          <Node>
            <Address category="ipv4-net">192.0.2.16/28</Address>
          </Node>
          <Service ip_protocol="6">
            <Port>80</Port>
          </Service>
          <AdditionalData dtype="xml">
            <iodef-sci:Platform SpecificationID="CPE_2.3"
             PlatformID="[CPE ID]"/>
          </AdditionalData>
        </System>
      </Flow>
      <Expectation action="block-host" />
      <Expectation action="other"/>
      <!-- <RecordItem> has an excerpt from a log -->
      <Record>
        <RecordData>
          <DateTime>2001-09-13T18:11:21+02:00</DateTime>
          <Description>a Web-server event record</Description>
          <RecordItem dtype="xml">



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 30]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


            <iodef-sci:EventReport SpecificationID="CEE_0.6">
              <iodef-sci:RawData>
                <CEE xmlns="http://cee.mitre.org">
                  .....
                </CEE>
              </iodef-sci:RawData>
            </iodef-sci:EventReport>
          </RecordItem>
        </RecordData>
      </Record>
    </EventData>
    <History>
      <!-- Contact was previously made with the source network owner -->
      <HistoryItem action="contact-source-site">
        <DateTime>2001-09-14T08:19:01+00:00</DateTime>
        <Description>Notification sent to
                     constituency-contact@192.0.2.200</Description>
      </HistoryItem>
    </History>
    <AdditionalData dtype="xml">
      <iodef-sci:Verification SpecificationID="OVAL_5.10">
        <iodef-sci:RawData>
          <oval_definitions
           xmlns="http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5"
           xmlns:ind-def=
           "http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5#independent"
           xmlns:linux-def=
           "http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5#linux"
           xmlns:oval="http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-common-5"
           xmlns:oval-def=
           "http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5"
           xmlns:unix-def=
           "http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5#unix"
           xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
            .....
          </oval_definitions>
        </iodef-sci:RawData>
      </iodef-sci:Verification>
      <iodef-sci:Verification SpecificationID="XCCDF_1.2">
        <iodef-sci:RawData>
          <xccdf:Benchmark id="xccdf_org.example_benchmark_example1"
           xml:lang="en" Id="toSign"
           xmlns:htm="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
           xmlns:xccdf="http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2"
           xmlns:cpe2-dict="http://cpe.mitre.org/dictionary/2.0">
            .....
          </xccdf:Benchmark>
        </iodef-sci:RawData>



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 31]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


      </iodef-sci:Verification>
    </AdditionalData>
  </Incident>
</IODEF-Document>


10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, January 2005.

   [RFC5070]  Danyliw, R., Meijer, J., and Y. Demchenko, "The Incident
              Object Description Exchange Format", RFC 5070,
              December 2007.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

   [RFC6045]  Moriarty, K., "Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID)",
              RFC 6045, November 2010.

   [RFC6046]  Moriarty, K. and B. Trammell, "Transport of Real-time
              Inter-network Defense (RID) Messages", RFC 6046,
              November 2010.

   [XML1.0]   Bray, T., Maler, E., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., and
              F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
              Edition)", W3C Recommendation, November 2008.

   [XMLschemaPart1]
              Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn,
              "XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition",
              W3C Recommendation, October 2004.

   [XMLschemaPart2]
              Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
              Second Edition", W3C Recommendation, October 2004.

   [XMLNames]
              Bray, T., Hollander, D., Layman, A., Tobin, R., and H.
              Thomson, ""Namespaces in XML (Third Edition)",



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 32]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


              W3C Recommendation, December 2009.

   [CAPEC]    The MITRE Corporation, "Common Attack Pattern Enumeration
              and Classification (CAPEC)".

   [CCE]      The MITRE Corporation, "Common Configuration Enumeration
              (CCE)".

   [CCSS]     Scarfone, K. and P. Mell, "The Common Configuration
              Scoring System (CCSS)", NIST Interagency Report 7502,
              December 2010.

   [CEE]      The MITRE Corporation, "Common Event Expression (CEE)".

   [CPE]      National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Common
              Platform Enumeration", June 2011.

   [CVE]      The MITRE Corporation, "Common Vulnerability and Exposures
              (CVE)".

   [CVRF]     ICASI, "Common Vulnerability Reporting Framework (CVRF)".

   [CVSS]     Peter Mell, Karen Scarfone, and Sasha Romanosky, "The
              Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) and Its
              Applicability to Federal Agency Systems".

   [CWE]      The MITRE Corporation, "Common Weakness Enumeration
              (CWE)".

   [CWSS]     The MITRE Corporation, "Common Weakness Scoring System
              (CWSS)".

   [OCIL]     David Waltermire and Karen Scarfone and Maria Casipe, "The
              Open Checklist Interactive Language (OCIL) Version 2.0",
              April 2011.

   [OVAL]     The MITRE Corporation, "Open Vulnerability and Assessment
              Language (OVAL)".

   [XCCDF]    David Waltermire and Charles Schmidt and Karen Scarfone
              and Neal Ziring, "Specification for the Extensible
              Configuration Checklist Description Format (XCCDF) version
              1.2 (DRAFT)", July 2011.

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3339]  Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the
              Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002.



Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 33]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   [RFC3552]  Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
              Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552,
              July 2003.

   [RFC3688]  Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
              January 2004.

   [RFC5322]  Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
              October 2008.

   [RFC6116]  Bradner, S., Conroy, L., and K. Fujiwara, "The E.164 to
              Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation
              Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)", RFC 6116,
              March 2011.

   [SCAP]     Waltermire, D., Quinn, S., Scarfone, K., and A.
              Halbardier, "The Technical Specification for the Security
              Content Automation Protocol (SCAP): SCAP Version 1.2",
              NIST Special Publication 800-126 Revision 2,
              September 2011.


Authors' Addresses

   Takeshi Takahashi
   National Institute of Information and Communications Technology
   4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi Koganei
   184-8795 Tokyo
   Japan

   Phone: +80 423 27 5862
   Email: takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp


   Kent Landfield
   McAfee, Inc
   5000 Headquarters Drive
   Plano, TX 75024
   USA

   Email: Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com










Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 34]


Internet-Draft                IODEF-ext-sci                     Feb 2012


   Thomas Millar
   US Department of Homeland Security, NPPD/CS&C/NCSD/US-CERT
   245 Murray Lane SW, Building 410, MS #732
   Washington, DC 20598
   USA

   Phone: +1 888 282 0870
   Email: thomas.millar@us-cert.gov


   Youki Kadobayashi
   Nara Institute of Science and Technology
   8916-5 Takayama, Ikoma
   630-0192 Nara
   Japan

   Email: youki-k@is.aist-nara.ac.jp


































Takahashi, et al.        Expires August 4, 2012                [Page 35]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.122, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/