MIVerteidigung
Ministère des Armées · COMCYBER
Public information on French military cyber defence.
DAS INTERNATIONALE CYBERPORTAL / DIRECTORY
Eine Welt voller Expertise.
Behörden, Reaktionsteams, Unternehmen und Forschung. Finden Sie passende Quellen für Ihr Land und Ihre Anforderungen.
Verteilung der FIRST-Profile · 883
Profile im Datenstand : 883 ·
- Government, Private and Public sectors
252 / 883 252 - Other commercial
207 / 883 207 - Industrial sector
95 / 883 95 - Financial sector
94 / 883 94 - ICT vendor customer base
57 / 883 57 - Sektor nicht angegeben
50 / 883 50 - Government & military
46 / 883 46 - Research & education
45 / 883 45 - ISP customer base
37 / 883 37
Land und Sektor bestimmen nicht den Zuständigkeitsbereich. Prüfen Sie die Bedingungen im offiziellen Profil. FIRST ↗
CEInstitutionen
CERT-EU
Cybersecurity for EU institutions, bodies and agencies.
U.Verteidigung
U.S. Cyber Command
Public information from the US military cyber command.
AUInstitutionen
Australian Cyber Security Centre
Australian cybersecurity guidance and resources.
NAVerteidigung
NATO · Cyber defence
Public cyber defence policy and cooperation.
NAVerteidigung
NATO CCDCOE
Cyber defence research, training and exercises.
UNForschung & Ausbildung
UNIDIR
Research on disarmament, security and technology.
MIForschung & Ausbildung
MITRE ATT&CK
Public knowledge base of documented adversary tactics and techniques.
Quelleninformationen
- Geprüfte Daten oder Richtwerte
- ATT&CK is a knowledge base grounded in observations. Its domains include Enterprise, Mobile and ICS.
- Praktische Nutzung
- Connect a technique with a trace and detection hypothesis. Distinguish having a log source from actually testing detection.
- Zu beachtende Grenze
- A shared technique cannot establish actor attribution. Technique coverage counts do not fully measure security.
Dokumentation geprüft am
NIInstitutionen
NIST · SP 800-61 Rev. 3
Prepare incident response within cybersecurity risk management.
Quelleninformationen
- Geprüfte Daten oder Richtwerte
- Revision 3 was published in April 2025 and supersedes Revision 2. It is a CSF 2.0 Community Profile.
- Praktische Nutzung
- Rehearse containment decisions, evidence preservation, communication and recovery. Compare planned actions with evidence produced during the exercise.
- Zu beachtende Grenze
- Reading the guide does not validate a local plan. Contacts, emergency access and dependencies need local testing.
Dokumentation geprüft am
Cybervorfälle: Entscheidungen und Nachweise
Qualifying a signal, preserving investigative material and restoring a service answer different questions. CSF 2.0 distinguishes recovery initiation, integrity of restoration assets, validation of restored assets and the end of recovery. These are outcomes to document, not certification or one mandatory procedure.
The twelve entries below are a selected, paraphrased part of CSF 2.0. Evidence columns, timelines and injects are original teaching proposals. They do not replace a local plan and imply no universal timing, severity level or authority. SP 800-61 Revision 3 has been final since April 2025 and supersedes Revision 2.
Explore NIST outcomes and the timeline →
Primary references and limits
Identifiers and outcome meanings come from CSF 2.0; SP 800-61r3 adds incident response and recovery recommendations. Evidence tables, times and scenarios are educational, with no client results, certification or actual notification.
- NIST · SP 800-61 Rev. 3 · Final · 2025-04-03
Community Profile CSF 2.0 ; remplace / supersedes Rev. 2 - NIST · SP 800-61r3 — recommandations détaillées / detailed recommendations · April 2025
Pages imprimées / printed pages 27–29, 34–35 : RS.MA, RS.AN, RC.RP, RC.CO - NIST · Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 · 2024-02-26 · NIST CSWP 29
Appendix A, printed pages 22–23 : official outcome identifiers - NIST · SP 800-184 — Guide for Cybersecurity Event Recovery · Final · 2016-12-22
Recovery planning, playbooks, testing and improvement
References reviewed
OAGemeinschaften & Standards
OASIS · STIX 2.1
Describe threat intelligence through structured objects and relationships.
Quelleninformationen
- Geprüfte Daten oder Richtwerte
- STIX 2.1 is an OASIS Standard dated 10 June 2021. It defines objects, properties and JSON serialisation.
- Praktische Nutzung
- Keep identifiers, dates, provenance and relationships. Check that the recipient interprets the same object type and validity period.
- Zu beachtende Grenze
- A syntactically valid object can still be stale, misattributed or weakly supported.
Dokumentation geprüft am
STIX-Indikatoren und TLP
Structured intelligence retains provenance and a version history. For an actionable OSINT note, separate collected facts, the producer’s assertion and the local conclusion, then state what still needs confirmation.
Version note: at review time the OASIS latest-stage URL points to a document dated 2 April 2025 titled STIX 2.1 Errata 01, incorporating Draft 01. Its draft errata status is retained in the citation; it is not presented as a newly approved final version. Agree marking encodings with the recipient and check the edition actually used.
Read the STIX, observations and TLP sharing reference →
References and verification scope
- OASIS · STIX 2.1 · OASIS Standard · 2021-06-10
§3.2, §3.6, §4.7, §4.14, §5.2, §7.2 - OASIS · STIX 2.1 Errata 01 · Draft 01 · 2025-04-02 · OASIS Standard incorporating Draft 01 of Errata 01
Status / Citation format · draft status identified separately
Sources checked on
NIInstitutionen
NIST · Post-quantum cryptography
Identify standards relevant to cryptographic transition.
Quelleninformationen
- Geprüfte Daten oder Richtwerte
- NIST distinguishes FIPS 203 for ML-KEM, FIPS 204 for ML-DSA and FIPS 205 for SLH-DSA. Key encapsulation and signatures are different functions.
- Praktische Nutzung
- Inventory protocols, libraries, keys and dependencies. Ask which versions are actually implemented and test interoperability, performance and rollback.
- Zu beachtende Grenze
- Having a standardised algorithm does not establish security of the complete integration or a universal migration deadline.
Postquantenkryptografie: vor der Migration vergleichen →
Dokumentation geprüft am