Configuring MISP Threat Levels To OpenCTI Scores A User Guide

Hey guys! Today, we're diving deep into a crucial aspect of cybersecurity integration: mapping MISP threat levels to OpenCTI scores. This configuration is super important for aligning your threat intelligence platforms and ensuring seamless communication between them. We'll break down why this matters, how it works, and how you can make the most of it. Let's get started!

Understanding the Need for Mapping Threat Levels

In the world of cybersecurity, different platforms use different scales to represent the severity of a threat. MISP (Malware Information Sharing Platform), a widely-used platform for sharing threat intelligence, employs a four-tiered threat level system: High, Medium, Low, and Undefined. On the other hand, OpenCTI (Open Cyber Threat Intelligence Platform) uses a scoring system to quantify the risk associated with an indicator or threat. To effectively integrate these platforms, it's essential to create a bridge between these scales. This is where mapping comes into play, and it's absolutely crucial for any organization looking to streamline their threat intelligence processes.

The core of this discussion revolves around the need for a configurable mapping between MISP's threat levels and OpenCTI's scores. Currently, there's a hard-coded logic within the connector that translates these levels, but this isn't flexible enough for diverse organizational needs. Different organizations might have varying risk appetites and therefore require a customized mapping to accurately reflect their specific threat landscape. For example, a financial institution might consider a "Medium" threat in MISP as a high-risk event in OpenCTI due to the potential financial impact. Thus, having the ability to adjust this mapping is not just a convenience but a necessity for tailored threat intelligence.

Furthermore, consider the practical implications of this mapping. When a threat is identified in MISP, its threat level is a critical piece of information. If this information is translated into an OpenCTI score that doesn't accurately reflect the severity, it can lead to misprioritization of security efforts. High-severity threats might be overlooked, while lower-severity threats might consume valuable resources. This misalignment can severely impact an organization's ability to respond effectively to cyber threats. Therefore, a configurable mapping ensures that OpenCTI accurately represents the threat landscape as perceived by MISP, allowing for better-informed decision-making and resource allocation.

To illustrate the significance, let's consider a hypothetical scenario. Suppose an organization uses the default hard-coded mapping, where a "Medium" threat in MISP translates to a score of 60 in OpenCTI. However, the organization's security policy dictates that any threat with a potential for data exfiltration should be considered high-risk. If a "Medium" threat in MISP involves a potential data exfiltration attempt, the default mapping might not adequately reflect the urgency of the situation. With a configurable mapping, the organization could adjust the score for a "Medium" threat to 80 or 90 in OpenCTI, ensuring that the threat receives the immediate attention it warrants. This level of customization is essential for aligning threat intelligence with specific organizational needs and policies.

The Current Hard-Coded Logic and Its Limitations

Currently, the connector uses a hard-coded logic to convert MISP threat levels into OpenCTI scores. This means the mapping is fixed and cannot be easily adjusted without modifying the connector's code. The existing logic looks something like this:

if threat_level == "1": // High
 score = 90
elif threat_level == "2": // Medium
 score = 60
elif threat_level == "3": // Low
 score = 30
else: // Undefined
 score = 50

While this hard-coded approach provides a basic translation, it has significant limitations. The primary issue is the lack of flexibility. Every organization has unique risk tolerances and operational contexts. What might be considered a medium-level threat in one organization could be a critical threat in another. For example, a small business might view a phishing campaign as a minor inconvenience, while a large financial institution would consider it a high-priority threat due to the potential for significant financial losses and reputational damage. The fixed mapping fails to account for these nuances, potentially leading to misprioritization of security efforts.

Another limitation of the current hard-coded system is its inability to adapt to evolving threat landscapes. Cyber threats are constantly changing, and the severity of different types of attacks can fluctuate over time. A threat that was once considered low-risk might become high-risk due to new vulnerabilities or attack techniques. The fixed mapping cannot dynamically adjust to these changes, making it difficult for organizations to stay ahead of emerging threats. For instance, a new ransomware variant might exploit a previously unknown vulnerability, increasing the severity of ransomware attacks. An organization using the hard-coded mapping might not immediately recognize the increased risk, potentially delaying their response and increasing their vulnerability.

Furthermore, the inflexibility of hard-coded logic creates maintenance challenges. When an organization needs to adjust the mapping, they must modify the connector's source code, which requires technical expertise and can be time-consuming. This process also introduces the risk of errors, which can disrupt the connector's functionality and impact threat intelligence operations. Additionally, any updates to the connector's code must be carefully tested and deployed to ensure compatibility and stability. This adds complexity to the maintenance process and can delay the implementation of necessary changes. In contrast, a configurable mapping system would allow administrators to easily adjust the settings through a user interface, without the need for coding or extensive testing.

Consider the scenario of regulatory compliance. Many industries are subject to regulations that mandate specific security controls and risk management practices. These regulations often require organizations to tailor their security measures to their specific risk profile. A hard-coded mapping might not align with these regulatory requirements, potentially leading to compliance violations. For example, a healthcare organization subject to HIPAA regulations might need to map certain threats to a higher severity level to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of patient data. A configurable mapping would allow the organization to customize the settings to meet these regulatory obligations, ensuring compliance and avoiding potential penalties.

The Proposed Solution: A Configurable Mapping

The solution is to introduce a configurable mapping option within the connector. This would allow users to customize how OpenCTI scores are mapped to MISP's