Network Working Group                                       J. Arvidsson
Request for Comments: 3067                                    Telia CERT
Category: Informational                                       A. Cormack
                                                            Y. Demchenko
                                                               J. Meijer
                                                           February 2001
Network Working Group                                       J. Arvidsson
Request for Comments: 3067                                    Telia CERT
Category: Informational                                       A. Cormack
                                                            Y. Demchenko
                                                               J. Meijer
                                                           February 2001

TERENA's Incident Object Description and Exchange Format Requirements


Status of this Memo


This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.


Copyright Notice


Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.




The purpose of the Incident Object Description and Exchange Format is to define a common data format for the description, archiving and exchange of information about incidents between CSIRTs (Computer Security Incident Response Teams) (including alert, incident in investigation, archiving, statistics, reporting, etc.). This document describes the high-level requirements for such a description and exchange format, including the reasons for those requirements. Examples are used to illustrate the requirements where necessary.


1. Conventions used in this document
1. 本文件中使用的公约

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 [1].

本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照RFC 2119[1]中所述进行解释。

2. Introduction
2. 介绍

This document defines requirements for the Incident object Description and Exchange Format (IODEF), which is the intended product of the Incident Taxonomy Working Group (ITDWG) at TERENA [2]. IODEF is planned to be a standard format which allows CSIRTs to exchange operational and statistical information; it may also provide a basis for the development of compatible and inter-operable tools for Incident recording, tracking and exchange.


Another aim is to extend the work of IETF IDWG (currently focused on Intrusion Detection exchange format and communication protocol) to the description of incidents as higher level elements in Network Security. This will involve CSIRTs and their constituency related issues.

另一个目标是将IETF IDWG(目前专注于入侵检测交换格式和通信协议)的工作扩展到将事件描述为网络安全的更高级别元素。这将涉及CSIRT及其选区相关问题。

   The IODEF set of documents of which this document is the first will
   contain IODEF Data Model and XML DTD specification.  Further
   discussion of this document will take place in the ITDWG mailing
   lists <> or <>, archives
   are available correspondently at and
   The IODEF set of documents of which this document is the first will
   contain IODEF Data Model and XML DTD specification.  Further
   discussion of this document will take place in the ITDWG mailing
   lists <> or <>, archives
   are available correspondently at and
2.1. Rationale
2.1. 根本原因

This work is based on attempts to establish cooperation and information exchange between leading/advanced CSIRTs in Europe and among the FIRST community. These CSIRTs understand the advantages of information exchange and cooperation in processing, tracking and investigating security incidents.


Computer Incidents are becoming distributed and International and involve many CSIRTs across borders, languages and cultures. Post-Incident information and statistics exchange is important for future Incident prevention and Internet security improvement. The key element for information exchange in all these cases is a common format for Incident (Object) description.


It is probable that in further development or implementation the IODEF might be used for forensic purposes, and this means that Incident description must be unambiguous and allow for future custody (archiving/documentation) features.


Another issue that is targeted by developing IODEF is a need to have higher level Incident description and exchange format than will be provided by IDS (Intrusion Detection Systems) and the proposed IDEF (Intrusion Detection Exchange Format). Compatibility with IDEF and other related standards will be satisfied by the IODEF requirement on modularity and extensibility. IODEF should vertically be compatible with IDMEF, IODEF might be able to include or reference IDMEF Alert message as initial information about Incident.


2.2. Incident Description Terms
2.2. 事件描述术语

A definition of the main terms used in the rest of document is given for clarity.


Where possible, existing definitions will be used; some definitions will need additional detail and further consideration.


Taxonomy of the Computer Security Incident related terminology made by TERENA's ITDWG [2] is presented in [12].


2.2.1. Attack
2.2.1. 袭击

An assault on system security that derives from an intelligent threat, i.e., an intelligent act that is a deliberate attempt (especially in the sense of a method or technique) to evade security services and violate the security policy of a system.


Attack can be active or passive, by insider or by outsider, or via attack mediator.


2.2.2. Attacker
2.2.2. 攻击者

Attacker is individual who attempts one or more attacks in order to achieve an objective(s).


For the purpose of IODEF attacker is described by its network ID, organisation which network/computer attack was originated and physical location information (optional).


2.2.3. CSIRT
2.2.3. CSIRT

CSIRT (Computer Security Incident Response Team) is used in IODEF to refer to the authority handling the Incident and creating Incident Object Description. The CSIRT is also likely to be involved in evidence collection and custody, incident remedy, etc.


In IODEF CSIRT represented by its ID, constituency, public key, etc.


2.2.4. Damage
2.2.4. 损坏

An intended or unintended consequence of an attack which affects the normal operation of the targeted system or service. Description of damage may include free text description of actual result of attack, and, where possible, structured information about the particular damaged system, subsystem or service.


2.2.5. Event
2.2.5. 事件

An action directed at a target which is intended to result in a change of state (status) of the target. From the point of view of event origination, it can be defined as any observable occurrence in a system or network which resulted in an alert being generated. For example, three failed logins in 10 seconds might indicate a brute-force login attack.


2.2.6. Evidence
2.2.6. 根据

Evidence is information relating to an event that proves or supports a conclusion about the event. With respect to security incidents (the events), it may include but is not limited to: data dump created by Intrusion Detection System (IDS), data from syslog file, kernel statistics, cache, memory, temporary file system, or other data that caused the alert or were collected after the incident happened.


Special rules and care must be taken when storing and archiving evidence, particularly to preserve its integrity. When necessary evidence should be stored encrypted.


According to the Guidelines for Evidence Collection and Archiving (Evidence) evidence must be strictly secured. The chain of evidence custody needs to be clearly documented.


It is essential that evidence should be collected, archived and preserved according to local legislation.


2.2.7. Incident
2.2.7. 发生的事情

An Incident is a security event that involves a security violation. An incident can be defined as a single attack or a group of attacks that can be distinguished from other attacks by the method of attack, identity of attackers, victims, sites, objectives or timing, etc.


An incident is a root element of the IODEF. In the context of IODEF, the term Incident is used to mean a Computer Security Incident or an IT Security Incident.


However we should distinguish between the generic definition of 'Incident' which is an event that might lead to damage or damage which is not too serious, and 'Security Incident' and 'IT Security Incident' which are defined below:


a) Security incident is an event that involves a security violation. This may be an event that violates a security policy, UAP, laws and jurisdictions, etc. A security incident may also be an incident that has been escalated to a security incident.

a) 安全事件是指涉及安全违规的事件。这可能是违反安全政策、UAP、法律和司法管辖区等的事件。安全事件也可能是已升级为安全事件的事件。

A security incident is worse than an incident as it affects the security of or in the organisation. A security incident may be logical, physical or organisational, for example a computer intrusion, loss of secrecy, information theft, fire or an alarm that doesn't work properly. A security incident may be caused on purpose or by accident. The latter may be if somebody forgets to lock a door or forgets to activate an access list in a router.


b) An IT security incident is defined according to [9] as any real or suspected adverse event in relation to the security of a computer or computer network. Typical security incidents within the IT area are: a computer intrusion, a denial-of-service attack, information theft or data manipulation, etc.

b) IT安全事件根据[9]定义为与计算机或计算机网络安全相关的任何真实或可疑的不利事件。IT领域内的典型安全事件包括:计算机入侵、拒绝服务攻击、信息盗窃或数据操纵等。

2.2.8. Impact
2.2.8. 影响

Impact describes result of attack expressed in terms of user community, for example the cost in terms of financial or other disruption


2.2.9. Target
2.2.9. 目标

A computer or network logical entity (account, process or data) or physical entity (component, computer, network or internetwork).


2.2.10. Victim
2.2.10. 受害者

Victim is individual or organisation which suffered the attack which is described in incident report.


For the purpose of IODEF victim is described by its network ID, organisation and location information.


2.2.11. Vulnerability
2.2.11. 弱点

A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited to violate the system's security policy.


Most systems have vulnerabilities of some sort, but this does not mean that the systems are too flawed to use. Not every threat results in an attack, and not every attack succeeds. Success depends on the degree of vulnerability, the strength of attacks, and the effectiveness of any countermeasures in use. If the attacks needed to exploit a vulnerability are very difficult to carry out, then the vulnerability may be tolerable. If the perceived benefit to an attacker is small, then even an easily exploited vulnerability may be tolerable. However, if the attacks are well understood and easily made, and if the vulnerable system is employed by a wide range of users, then it is likely that there will be enough benefit for someone to make an attack.


2.2.12. Other terms
2.2.12. 其他术语

Other terms used: alert, activity, IDS, Security Policy, etc. - are defined in related I-Ds, RFCs and standards [3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].


3. General Requirements
3. 一般要求

3.1. The IODEF shall reference and use previously published RFCs where possible.

3.1. IODEF应尽可能参考和使用先前发布的RFC。

Comment: The IETF has already developed a number of standards in the areas of networks and security that are actually deployed in present Internet. Current standards provide framework for compatibility of IODEF with other related technologies necessary to operate /implement IODEF in practice. Another issue of compatibility for the IODEF is its general compatibility with IDEF currently being developed by IETF IDEWG. In the interest of time and compatibility, defined and accepted standards should be used wherever possible.

评论:IETF已经在网络和安全领域制定了许多标准,这些标准实际上已在当前的互联网中部署。现行标准为IODEF与其他相关技术的兼容性提供了框架,这些技术是在实践中操作/实施IODEF所必需的。IODEF的另一个兼容性问题是它与IETF IDEWG目前正在开发的IDEF的一般兼容性。为了时间和兼容性,应尽可能使用定义和接受的标准。

In particularly, IODEF specification proposals SHOULD rely heavily on existing communications, encryption and language standards, where possible.


4. Description Format
4. 描述格式

4.1. IODEF shall support full internationalization and localization.

4.1. IODEF应支持完全国际化和本地化。

Comment: Since some Incidents need involvement of CSIRTs from different countries, cultural and geographic regions, the IODEF description must be formatted such that they can be presented to an operator in a local language and adhering to local presentation formats.


Although metalanguage for IODEF identifiers and labels is considered to be English, a local IODEF implementation might be capable to translate metalanguage identifiers and labels into local language and presentations if necessary.


Localized presentation of dates, time and names may also be required. In cases where the messages contain text strings and names that need characters other than Latin-1 (or ISO 8859-1), the information preferably should be represented using the ISO/IEC IS 10646-1 character set and encoded using the UTF-8 transformation format, and optionally using local character sets and encodings [13].

可能还需要本地化的日期、时间和名称。如果消息包含文本字符串和需要除拉丁语-1(或ISO 8859-1)以外的字符的名称,则最好使用ISO/IEC IS 10646-1字符集表示信息,并使用UTF-8转换格式进行编码,还可以选择使用本地字符集和编码[13]。

4.2. The IODEF must support modularity in Incident description to allow aggregation and filtering of data.

4.2. IODEF必须支持事件描述中的模块化,以允许数据的聚合和过滤。

Comment: It is suggested that Incident description with IODEF might include external information, e.g., from IDS, or reference externally stored evidence custody data, or such information might be removed from current IODEF description, e.g., in purposes of privacy or security. Another practical/real life motivation for this requirement is to give possibility for some CSIRTs/managers to perform filtering and/or data aggregation functions on IODEF descriptions for the purposes of statistics, reporting and high level Incident information exchange between CSIRTs and/or their constituency and sponsors.


Therefore the IODEF descriptions MUST be structured to facilitate these operations. This also implies to strong IODEF semantics.


4.3. IODEF must support the application of an access restriction policy attribute to every element.

4.3. IODEF必须支持对每个元素应用访问限制策略属性。

Comment: IODEF Incident descriptions potentially contain sensitive or private information (such as passwords, persons/organisations identifiers or forensic information (evidence data)) and in some cases may be exposed to non-authorised persons. Such situations may arise particularly in case of Incident information exchange between CSIRTs or other involved bodies. Some cases may be addressed by encrypting IODEF elements, however this will not always be possible.


Therefore, to prevent accidental disclosure of sensitive data, parts of the IODEF object must be marked with access restriction attributes. These markings will be particularly useful when used with automated processing systems.


5. Communications Mechanisms Requirements
5. 通信机制要求

5.1. IODEF exchange will normally be initiated by humans using standard communication protocols, for example, e-mail, WWW/HTTP, LDAP.

5.1. IODEF交换通常由人类使用标准通信协议启动,例如电子邮件、WWW/HTTP、LDAP。

Comment: IODEF description is normally created by a human using special or standard text editors. The IODEF is targeted to be processed by automated Incident handling systems but still must be human readable, able to be viewed and browsed with standard tools (e.g., browsers or electronic table processors or database tools like MS Excel or Access). Incident information exchange will normally require authorisation by an operator or CSIRT manager so is not expected to be initiated automatically. The role of Incident handling system is to provide assistance and tools for performing the exchange.

注释:IODEF描述通常由人工使用特殊或标准文本编辑器创建。IODEF的目标是由自动事件处理系统处理,但仍然必须是人类可读的,能够使用标准工具(例如浏览器或电子表格处理器或MS Excel或Access等数据库工具)查看和浏览。事件信息交换通常需要操作员或CSIRT经理的授权,因此预计不会自动启动。事件处理系统的作用是为执行交换提供协助和工具。

It is important to distinguish the purposes of the machine readable and exchangeable IDEF Intrusion message format and the human oriented and created IODEF Incident description.


Communications security requirements will be applied separately according to local policy so are not defined by this document.


6. Message Contents
6. 消息内容

6.1. The root element of the IO description should contain a unique identification number (or identifier), IO purpose and default permission level

6.1. IO描述的根元素应包含唯一标识号(或标识符)、IO用途和默认权限级别

Comment: Unique identification number (or identifier) is necessary to distinguish one Incident from another. It is suggested that unique identification number will contain information at least about IO creator, i.e. CSIRT or related body. The classification of the Incident may also be used to form a unique identification number. IO purpose will actually control which elements are included in the IODEF object Purposes may include incident alert/registration, handling, archiving, reporting or statistics. The purpose, incident type or status of Incident investigation may require different levels of access permission for the Incident information.


It is considered that root element of the IODEF will be <INCIDENT> and additional information will be treated as attributes of the root element.


6.2. The content of the IODEF description should contain the type of the attack if it is known.

6.2. IODEF描述的内容应包含已知的攻击类型。

It is expected that this type will be drawn from a standardized list of events; a new type of event may use a temporary implementation-specific type if the event type has not yet been standardized.


Comment: Incident handling may involve many different staff members and teams. It is therefore essential that common terms are used to describe incidents.


If the event type has not yet been standardized, temporary type definition might be given by team created IO. It is expected that new type name will be self-explanatory and derived from a similar, existing type definition.


6.3. The IODEF description must be structured such that any relevant advisories, such as those from CERT/CC, CVE, can be referenced.

6.3. IODEF说明的结构必须确保可以引用任何相关咨询,例如来自CERT/CC、CVE的咨询。

Comment: Using standard Advisories and lists of known Attacks and Vulnerabilities will allow the use of their recommendations on Incident handling/prevention. Such information might be included as an attribute to the attack or vulnerability type definition.


6.4. IODEF may include a detailed description of the attack that caused the current Incident.

6.4. IODEF可能包括导致当前事件的攻击的详细描述。

Comment: Description of attack includes information about attacker and victim, the appearance of the attack and possible impact. At the early stage of Intrusion alert and Incident handling there is likely to be minimal information, during handling of the Incident this will grow to be sufficient for Incident investigation and remedy. Element <ATTACK> should be one of the main elements of Incident description.


6.5. The IODEF description must include or be able to reference additional detailed data related to this specific underlying event(s)/activity, often referred as evidence.

6.5. IODEF描述必须包括或能够参考与该特定基础事件/活动相关的额外详细数据,通常称为证据。

Comment: For many purposes Incident description does not need many details on specific event(s)/activity that caused the Incident; this information may be referenced as external information (by means of URL). In some cases it might be convenient to store separately evidence that has different access permissions. It is foreseen that another standard will be proposed for evidence custody [5].


6.6. The IODEF description MUST contain the description of the attacker and victim.

6.6. IODEF描述必须包含攻击者和受害者的描述。

Comment: This information is necessary to identify the source and target of the attack. The minimum information about attacker and victim is their IP or Internet addresses, extended information will identify their organisations allowing CSIRTs to take appropriate measures for their particular constituency.


6.7. The IODEF description must support the representation of different types of device addresses, e.g., IP address (version 4 or 6) and Internet name.

6.7. IODEF描述必须支持不同类型设备地址的表示,例如IP地址(版本4或6)和Internet名称。

Comment: The sites from which attack is launched might have addresses in various levels of the network protocol hierarchy (e.g., Data layer 2 MAC addresses or Network layer 3 IP addresses). Additionally, the devices involved in an intrusion event might use addresses that are not IP-centric, e.g., ATM-addresses. It is also understood that information about the source and target of the attack might be obtained from IDS and include the IP address, MAC address or both.

注释:发起攻击的站点可能在网络协议层次结构的不同级别上具有地址(例如,数据层2 MAC地址或网络层3 IP地址)。此外,入侵事件中涉及的设备可能使用非以IP为中心的地址,例如ATM地址。也可以理解,关于攻击源和目标的信息可能从IDS获得,包括IP地址、MAC地址或两者。

6.8. IODEF must include the Identity of the creator of the Incident Object (CSIRT or other authority). This may be the sender in an information exchange or the team currently handling the incident.

6.8. IODEF必须包含事件对象创建者的身份(CSIRT或其他机构)。这可能是信息交换中的发送者或当前处理事件的团队。

Comment: The identity of Incident description creator is often valuable information for Incident response. In one possible scenario the attack may progress through the network, comparison of corresponding incidents reported by different authorities might provide some additional information about the origin of the attack. This is also useful information at post-incident information handling/exchange stage.


6.9. The IODEF description must contain an indication of the possible impact of this event on the target. The value of this field should be drawn from a standardized list of values if the attack is recognized as known, or expressed in a free language by responsible CSIRT team member.

6.9. IODEF描述必须包含此事件对目标可能产生影响的指示。如果攻击被认为是已知的,或者由负责的CSIRT团队成员以自由语言表示,则该字段的值应从标准化的值列表中提取。

Comment: Information concerning the possible impact of the event on the target system provides an indication of what the attacker is attempting to do and is critical data for the CSIRTs to take actions and perform


damage assessment. If no reference information (Advisories) is available, this field may be filled in based on CSIRT team experience.


It is expected that most CSIRTs will develop Incident handling support systems, based on existing Advisories (such as those from CERT/CC, CVE, etc.) that usually contain list of possible impacts for identified attacks.


This also relates to the development of IDEF which will be implemented in intelligent IDS, able to retrieve information from standard databases of attacks and vulnerabilities [3].


6.10. The IODEF must be able to state the degree of confidence in the report information.

6.10. IODEF必须能够说明报告信息的可信度。

Comment: Including this information is essential at the stage of Incident creation, particularly in cases when intelligent automatic IDS or expert systems are used. These normally use statistical engines to estimate the event probability.


6.11. The IODEF description must provide information about the actions taken in the course of this incident by previous CSIRTs.

6.11. IODEF说明必须提供有关先前CSIRT在此事件过程中采取的行动的信息。

Comment: The IODEF describes an Incident throughout its life-time from Alert to closing and archiving. It is essential to track all actions taken by all involved parties. This will help determine what further action needs to be taken, if any. This is especially important in case of Incident information exchange between CSIRTs in process of investigation.


6.12. The IODEF must support reporting of the time of all stages along Incident life-time.

6.12. IODEF必须支持报告事件生命周期内所有阶段的时间。

Comment: Time is important from both a reporting and correlation point of view. Time is one of main components that can identify the same Incident or attack if launched from many sites or distributed over the network. Time is also essential to be able to track the life of an Incident including Incident exchange between CSIRTs in process of investigating.


6.13. Time shall be reported as the local time and time zone offset from UTC. (Note: See RFC 1902 for guidelines on reporting time.)

6.13. 时间应报告为当地时间和时区与UTC的偏移量。(注:有关报告时间的指南,请参见RFC 1902。)

Comment: For event correlation purposes, it is important that the manager be able to normalize the time information reported in the IODEF descriptions.


6.14. The format for reporting the date must be compliant with all current standards for Year 2000 rollover, and it must have sufficient capability to continue reporting date values past the year 2038.

6.14. 报告日期的格式必须符合2000年过渡的所有现行标准,并且必须有足够的能力继续报告2038年之后的日期值。

Comment: It is stated in the purposes of the IODEF that the IODEF shall describe the Incident throughout its life-time. In the case of archiving this duration might be unlimited. Therefore, implementations that limit expression of time value (such as 2038 date representation limitation in "Unix time") MUST be avoided.


6.15. Time granularity in IO time parameters shall not be specified by the IODEF.

6.15. IODEF不应指定IO时间参数中的时间粒度。

Comment: The time data may be included into IODEF description by existing information systems, retrieved from incident reporting messages or taken from IDS data or other event registration tools. Each of these cases may have its own different time granularity. For the purposes of implementation, it should be possible to handle time at different stages according to the local system capabilities.


6.16. The IODEF should support confidentiality of the description content.

6.16. IODEF应支持描述内容的保密性。

The selected design should be capable of supporting a variety of encryption algorithms and must be adaptable to a wide variety of environments.


Comment: IODEF Incident descriptions potentially contain sensitive or private information (such as forensic data (evidence data), passwords, or persons/organisations identifiers) which would be of great interest to an attacker or malefactor. Incident information normally will be stored on a networked computer, which potentially may be exposed to attacks (or compromised). Incident information may be transmitted across uncontrolled network segments. Therefore, it is important that the content be protected from unauthorised access and modification. Furthermore, since the legal environment for privacy


and encryption technologies are varied from regions and countries and change often, it is important that the design selected be capable of supporting a number of different encryption options and be adaptable by the user to a variety of environments. Additional measures may be undertaken for securing the Incident during communication but this issue is outside of IODEF scope as it implies more strict rules for IO archiving and storing in general.


6.17. The IODEF should ensure the integrity of the description content.

6.17. IODEF应确保描述内容的完整性。

The selected design should be capable of supporting a variety of integrity mechanisms and must be adaptable to a wide variety of environments.


Comment: Special measures should be undertaken to prevent malicious IO changes.


Additional measures may be undertaken for securing the Incident during communication but this issue is outside of IODEF scope.


6.18. The IODEF should ensure the authenticity and non-repudiation of the message content.

6.18. IODEF应确保消息内容的真实性和不可否认性。

Comment: Authenticity and accountability is needed by many teams, especially given the desire to automatically handle IOs, therefore it MUST be included in the IODEF. Because of the importance of IO authenticity and non-repudiation to many teams and especially in case of communication between them, the implementation of these requirements is strongly RECOMMENDED.


6.19. The IODEF description must support an extension mechanism which may be used by implementers. This allows future implementation-specific or experimental data. The implementer MUST indicate how to interpret any included extensions.

6.19. IODEF描述必须支持可由实现者使用的扩展机制。这允许将来实现特定数据或实验数据。实现者必须指明如何解释任何包含的扩展。

Comment: Implementers might wish to supply extra data such as information for internal purposes or necessary for the particular implementation of their Incident handling system. These data may be removed or not in external communications but it is essential to mark them as additional to prevent wrong interpretation by different systems.


6.20. The semantics of the IODEF description must be well defined.

6.20. 必须很好地定义IODEF描述的语义。

Comment: IODEF is a human oriented format for Incident description, and IODEF description should be capable of being read by humans. The use of automatic parsing tools is foreseen but should not be critically necessary. Therefore, IODEF must provide good semantics, which will be key to understanding what the description contains. In some cases the IODEF description will be used for automatic decision making, so it is important that the description be interpreted correctly. This is an argument for using language-based semantics. The metalanguage for IODEF identifiers and labels is proposed to be English, a local IODEF implementation might be able to translate metalanguage identifiers and labels into local language and presentations if necessary.


7. IODEF extensibility
7. IODEF可扩展性

7.1. The IODEF itself MUST be extensible. It is essential that when the use of new technologies and development of automated Incident handling system demands extension of IODEF, the IODEF will be capable to include new information.

7.1. IODEF本身必须是可扩展的。当新技术的使用和自动化事件处理系统的开发需要扩展IODEF时,IODEF将能够包含新信息,这一点至关重要。

Comment: In addition to the need to extend IODEF to support new Incident handling tools, it is also suggested that IODEF will incorporate new developments from related standardisation areas such as IDEF for IDS or the development of special format for evidence custody. The procedure for extension should be based on CSIRT/IODEF community acceptance/approval.


8. Security Considerations
8. 安全考虑

This memo describes requirements to an Incident Object Description and Exchange Format, which intends to define a common data format for the description, archiving and exchange of information about incidents between CSIRTs (including alert, incident in investigation, archiving, statistics, reporting, etc.). In that respect the implementation of the IODEF is a subject to security considerations. Particular security requirement to access restriction indication is discussed in section 4.3, requirements to Incident description confidentiality, integrity, authenticity and non-repudiation are described in sections 6.16, 6.17, 6.18.


9. References
9. 工具书类

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

[1] Bradner,S.,“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”,BCP 14,RFC 2119,1997年3月。

   [2]  Incident Taxonomy and Description Working Group Charter -
   [2]  Incident Taxonomy and Description Working Group Charter -

[3] Intrusion Detection Exchange Format Requirements by Wood, M. - December 2000, Work in Progress.

[3] Wood提出的入侵检测交换格式要求,M.-2000年12月,正在进行中。

[4] Intrusion Detection Message Exchange Format Extensible Markup Language (XML) Document Type Definition by D. Curry, H. Debar - February 2001, Work in Progress.

[4] 入侵检测消息交换格式可扩展标记语言(XML)文档类型定义,D.Curry,H.Debar,2001年2月,正在进行中。

[5] Guidelines for Evidence Collection and Archiving by Dominique Brezinski, Tom Killalea - July 2000, Work in Progress.

[5] 多米尼克·布雷津斯基(Dominique Brezinski,Tom Killalea)的证据收集和归档指南——2000年7月,正在进行中。

[6] Brownlee, N. and E. Guttman, "Expectations for Computer Security Incident Response", BCP 21, RFC 2350, June 1998.

[6] Brownlee,N.和E.Guttman,“对计算机安全事件响应的期望”,BCP 21,RFC 23501998年6月。

[7] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary", FYI 36, RFC 2828, May 2000.

[7] Shirey,R.,“互联网安全词汇表”,供参考36,RFC 28282000年5月。

[8] Establishing a Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC). NIST Special Publication 800-3, November, 1991

[8] 建立计算机安全事件响应能力(CSIRC)。NIST特别出版物800-3,1991年11月

[9] Handbook for Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs), Moira J. West-Brown, Don Stikvoort, Klaus-Peter Kossakowski. - CMU/SEI-98-HB-001. - Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, 1998.

[9] 计算机安全事故响应小组(CSIRT)手册,莫伊拉·J·西布朗,唐·斯蒂克沃特,克劳斯·彼得·科萨科夫斯基。-CMU/SEI-98-HB-001-宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡:卡内基梅隆大学,1998年。

   [10] A Common Language for Computer Security Incidents by John D.
        Howard and Thomas A. Longstaff. -  Sandia Report: SAND98-8667,
        Sandia National Laboratories -
   [10] A Common Language for Computer Security Incidents by John D.
        Howard and Thomas A. Longstaff. -  Sandia Report: SAND98-8667,
        Sandia National Laboratories -
   [11] Best Current Practice of incident classification and reporting
        schemes currently used by active CSIRTs. -
   [11] Best Current Practice of incident classification and reporting
        schemes currently used by active CSIRTs. -
   [12] Taxonomy of the Computer Security Incident related terminology -
   [12] Taxonomy of the Computer Security Incident related terminology -
   [13] Multilingual Support in Internet/IT Applications. -
   [13] Multilingual Support in Internet/IT Applications. -



   This document was discussed at the Incident Taxonomy and Description
   Working Group seminars (
   csirt/tf-csirt000929prg.html#itdwg) in the frame of TERENA Task Force
   TF-CSIRT (  Incident
   Taxonomy and Description Working Group at TERENA can be contacted via
   the mailing lists <> or <>,
   archives are available correspondently at and
   This document was discussed at the Incident Taxonomy and Description
   Working Group seminars (
   csirt/tf-csirt000929prg.html#itdwg) in the frame of TERENA Task Force
   TF-CSIRT (  Incident
   Taxonomy and Description Working Group at TERENA can be contacted via
   the mailing lists <> or <>,
   archives are available correspondently at and

Authors' Addresses


Jimmy Arvidsson Telia CERT

Jimmy Arvidsson Telia证书


Andrew Cormack JANET-CERT

Andrew Cormack JANET-CERT


Yuri Demchenko TERENA



Jan Meijer SURFnet

Jan Meijer冲浪网


Full Copyright Statement


Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.


This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.


The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.






Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.