Skip to main content

Collaborative Automated Course of Action Operations (CACAO) for Cyber Security

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
Authors Bret Jordan , Allan Thomson , Jyoti Verma
Last updated 2019-06-12 (Latest revision 2019-05-02)
RFC stream (None)
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
IETF                                                           B. Jordan
Internet-Draft                                      Symantec Corporation
Intended status: Informational                                A. Thomson
Expires: December 14, 2019                            LookingGlass Cyber
                                                                J. Verma
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                           June 12, 2019

 Collaborative Automated Course of Action Operations (CACAO) for Cyber


   This is the charter for the Working Group: Collaborative Automated
   Course of Action Operations (CACAO) for Cyber Security

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   ( in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Jordan, et al.          Expires December 14, 2019               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                    CACAO                        June 2019

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Goals and Deliverables  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3

1.  Introduction

   To defend against threat actors and their tactics, techniques, and
   procedures, organizations need to manually identify, create, and
   document prevention, mitigation, and remediation steps.  These steps
   when grouped together into a course of action playbook are used to
   protect systems, networks, data, and users.  The problem is, once
   these steps have been created there is no standardized and structured
   way to document them or easily share them across organizational
   boundaries and technology stacks.

   This working group will create a standard that implements the course
   of action playbook model for cybersecurity operations.  Each
   collaborative course of action, such as recommended prevention,
   mitigation and remediation steps, will consist of a sequence of cyber
   defense actions that can be executed by the various systems that can
   act on those actions.  These courses of actions should be
   referenceable by other cyber threat intelligence that provides
   support for related data such as threat actors, campaigns, intrusion
   sets, malware, attack patterns, and other adversarial techniques,
   tactics, and procedures.

   This solution will specifically enable:

   1.  the creation and documentation of course of action playbooks in a
       structured machine-readable format

   2.  organizations to digitally sign course of action playbooks

   3.  the securely sharing and distribution of course of action
       playbooks across organizational boundaries and technology stacks

   4.  the creation and documentation of processing instructions for
       course of action playbooks in a machine readable format


   This solution will contain at a minimum a data model specifying the
   course of action playbooks; a defined set of functional capabilities

Jordan, et al.          Expires December 14, 2019               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                    CACAO                        June 2019

   and associated interfaces; and an exchange protocol between products.
   Where possible the working group may reuse and/or reference existing
   data models, like OASIS OpenC2 and other IETF standards (e.g., I2NSF,
   YANG, NETCONF, etc) that define the atomic actions to be included in
   a process or sequence.

2.  Goals and Deliverables

   This working group has the following major goals and deliverables

   o  CACAO Use Cases and Requirements

      *  Specify the use cases and requirements

   o  CACAO Functional Architecture: Roles and Interfaces

      *  Specify the system functions and roles that are needed to
         enable Collaborative Courses of Action

   o  CACAO Protocol Specification

      *  Specify and standardize the configuration for at least one
         protocol that can be used to distribute courses of action in
         both a direct delivery and publish-subscribe method

   o  CACAO JSON Data Model

      *  Create a JSON data model that can capture and enable
         collaborative courses of action

   o  CACAO Interoperability Test Documents

      *  Define and create a series of tests and documents to assist
         with interoperability of the various systems involved.

   The working group may decide to not publish the use cases and
   requirements; and test documents.  That decision will be made during
   the lifetime of the working group.

Authors' Addresses

   Bret Jordan
   Symantec Corporation
   350 Ellis Street
   Mountain View  CA 94043


Jordan, et al.          Expires December 14, 2019               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                    CACAO                        June 2019

   Allan Thomson
   LookingGlass Cyber
   10740 Parkridge Blvd, Suite 200
   Reston  VA 20191


   Jyoti Verma
   Cisco Systems
   170 West Tasman Dr.
   San Jose  CA 95134


Jordan, et al.          Expires December 14, 2019               [Page 4]