[Discussion] What are we making? -- CLIENT Side

[Martin Holste]

I like the idea, but are there really that many different actions to be
taken, and aren't they going to be org specific?  If I know that an IP is
spamming, I don't just want to block them from emailing, I want to block all
access from that IP since it is untrustworthy.  But I do think there is a
lot of value in developing and distributing better language for describing
why the given IP/host is now on the list and other descriptions.  I'm more
for giving orgs the most information that we can, and leaving it to them to
implement the actual blocking decisions.

--Martin

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Blake Hartstein <urule99 at gmail.com> wrote:

> What if we focus on developing and distributing a better language for
> communicating actionable events?
> The idea is to make all intelligence more valuable and immediate. If I
> see this input event, alert, network, ISP, javascript, URL, how does it
> impact me, and what do I do about it? Instead of just collecting and
> distributing, the goal is to direct the actions for (ISP takedown,
> firewall, admin action, more). This enhances all of the prior research
> we've already done.
>
>
> Blake
>
>
>
> robert.jamison at bt.com wrote:
> > It seems we're a split camp with:
> >
> > [Keynesian CAMP]
> > Client Side Product/Service with ability to protect/detect compromise on
> > grannyx home user
> > *scope most thoroughly represented by Martin's " RFC: Proposal for
> > Analysis Framework"
> >
> > [Supply Side CAMP]
> > Focus on server side protection for net critical assets
> > *Andre/Jack "What is absolutely horrible in its current state is
> > IDS/IPS" / "Client side is simply not possible due to political and
> > religious issues."
> >
> > Additional notes gathered (I've just caught up on my reading;-)
> >
> > (a) Consideration for re-write defanging capability as inline protection
> > (b) Efficiency in stream storage--essentially normalize data inspection
> > so it doesn't have to be redone by multiple engines
> > (c) XML vs. Binary distribution of verbose alerts vs. instruction
> > inferred datapoints
> > (d) Consideration for extending existing project Bro
> >
> > Anything I'm missing?
> >
> > Rob
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20081022/6af17dfb/attachment-0002.html>