Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Severity field in IDF #2575

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

kamil-certat
Copy link
Contributor

Severity is expected in IntelMQ for a long time and partially, it's already used by e.g. ShadowServer reports. This implementation is based on their understanding of the field, but with explicit mentioning that operators could adjust it based on their knowledge.

This is not intended to be an ultimate severity classification, but a help for first triage of received events.

As the topic has already been discussed in #2365, I do not open a separated IEP for that. The discussion didn't have a clear outcome, but since then the severity information from Shadowserver has already been implemented and is in use by at least some IntelMQ instances. Implementing it in the default IDF helps wider adoption and prioritisation.

Compatibility: as no bot uses the field by default at the moment, there is no incompatibility risk if the local operator uses modified IDF schema or stores all data in e.g. SQL database. To prevent issues, until the next major release the official bots using the field should fall back to extra.<field name> if the field does not exist in the local IDF.

Close #2365

Severity is expected in IntelMQ for a long time and partially, it's
already used by e.g. ShadowServer reports. This implementation is
based on their understanding of the field, but with explicit
mentioning that operators could adjust it based on their knowledge.

This is not intended to be an ultimate severity classification,
but a help for first triage of recived events.

Close certtools#2365
@sebix sebix added this to the 3.4.0 milestone Mar 3, 2025
Copy link
Member

@sebix sebix left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • missing documentation in docs/user/event.md
  • missing documentation in NEWS.md

@@ -93,4 +94,4 @@ CREATE INDEX "idx_events_source.asn" ON events USING btree ("source.asn");
CREATE INDEX "idx_events_source.ip" ON events USING btree ("source.ip");
CREATE INDEX "idx_events_source.fqdn" ON events USING btree ("source.fqdn");
CREATE INDEX "idx_events_time.observation" ON events USING btree ("time.observation");
CREATE INDEX "idx_events_time.source" ON events USING btree ("time.source");
CREATE INDEX "idx_events_time.source" ON events USING btree ("time.source");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

missing newline at end of file

@sebix
Copy link
Member

sebix commented Mar 7, 2025

Upgrade function in intelmq/lib/upgrades to update the harmonization.conf is missing too

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Needed in the IDF (intelmq data format): severity
2 participants