Hi, Chuck - As others have said, the basic functionality of Incident relations is very valuable to us. The default value of Relate is good for 99+% of Artifacts, and we turn it off for artifact types where the value of relations is very low - specifically, Port - where it would be very misleading to allow Resilient to make connections.
We also plan to make more use of Artifacts and their interrelations with new and better Hit data coming through from our ThreatConnect server, which will in effect be a threat data concentrator. I have written a custom threat feed for this, if anyone is interested.
We are also experimenting with synthetic/custom Artifacts that will enable us to use the Relate function to make connections programatically between Incidents and this should provide an input to a future SOAR module that will support highly automated triaging operations.
There are a number of improvements to the Hit and threat feed logic (such as 'last updated' timestamps even when Hit data does not change) and to the flexibility of Hit display that would be good - and have been suggested through the IBM Aha! site.
But returning to Artifact/Relate - this is very valuable and has been set to work the way it is now, so please make any changes fully backward-compatible!
I'm happy to take any additional questions direct or via this thread.
Best regards - Edwin Bolton
------------------------------
Edwin Bolton
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Fri October 30, 2020 04:07 PM
From: Chuck Schauber
Subject: Artifacts "Relate?" feature
Hi Everyone,
The Artifacts team is considering some changes to the Artifacts widget functionality. Specifically, we wondering if anyone uses the "Relate?" feature in this Artifacts widget. If you do, could you tell us how you use it? Does the behavior of the feature confuse you? How would you like this to work? Please share your feedback!
------------------------------
Chuck Schauber
Product Management
IBM Resilient
Cambridge MA
------------------------------