3 ms·
My highly subjective opinion is Crowdstrike's naming convention is the best and every other security company should use that for public material but use whateve
by _8j50 4y ago
My highly subjective opinion is Crowdstrike's naming convention is the best and every other security company should use that for public material but use whatever naming convention they want in private.
I've been in situations where I would find attribution to an actor for something I am looking into but I had no idea $randomvendor was talking about the same actor $anothervendor had quite a bit of concerning write ups on until much later on.
- nl 4y agoTo generalise hugely following Cloudstrike's approach to many things is a good idea.
- thenerdhead 4y agoTheir convention is pretty common sense. An animal(or mythological creature) associated with an origin/actor and a different adjective to describe the threat. This is pretty old-school military jargon and is simple enough that the public could get a general idea. Not sure I agree with the use of spiders or jackals though. Spiders don't quite make sense for financial motivation/greed(unless the reference is pure "web" related). Jackals aren't well known outside of myth to be tricksters. Perhaps these animals make more sense from an ignorant American perspective: Financial gain/greed - Rat Hacktivism - Octopus https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/naming-adversaries-and-why-it-matters-to-security-teams/ https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/naming-adversaries-and-why-...