If we go back to using "relationship_type", do we still need "name" and "description" ?
Thanks,
Bret
Bret Jordan CISSP
Director of Security Architecture and Standards | Office of the CTO
Blue Coat Systems
PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447 F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
"Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg."
On Aug 10, 2016, at 15:15, Wunder, John A. <> wrote:
Unless anyone has any objections I’ll go through the documents tomorrow and make this update.On 8/10/16, 5:14 PM, "Back, Greg" <> wrote: Agreed. There's also type, definition_type, and definition properties on marking-definition objects, so it's not unprecedented (and actually rather consistent). Greg-----Original Message-----From: [mailto:] On Behalf OfWunder, John A.Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:25 PMTo: Terry MacDonald <>; Paul Patrick<>Cc: Kemp, David P <>; : Re: [cti] Relationship object - name propertyAgreed. I think our reservations about having both “type” and“relationship_type” are probably very minor compared to the extra claritythis would bring.From: <> on behalf of Terry MacDonald<>Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 4:19 PMTo: Paul Patrick <>Cc: "Kemp, David P" <>, ""<>Subject: Re: [cti] Relationship object - name propertyThat makes sense to me to change the field from name to relationship-type,and would potentially help differentiate the SROs from the SDOs.CheersTerry MacDonaldCosiveOn 9/08/2016 3:30 AM, "Paul Patrick" <<mailto:> > wrote: For a relationship, I agree with David that ‘relationship-type’ wouldbe better than name Paul Patrick On 8/8/16, 11:17 AM, "<mailto:> on behalf of Kemp, David P"< <mailto:> on behalf <mailto:> > wrote: "Threat Actor A" and "Threat Actor B" are vertex unique identifierswhich (I assume) would be carried in the name field of those vertices."related-to" is a class of edge but does not identify a specific edge, so I'dthink that "label" or "relationship-type" is more appropriate than "name". Is an edge uniquely identified by anything other than two vertexIDs? If not, edges would not have names. Dave This email and any attachments thereto may contain private,confidential, and/or privileged material for the sole use of the intendedrecipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or anyattachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not theintended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanentlydelete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
