intelligence-sharing

Use when the user asks about ISAC participation, TAXII feeds, MISP communities, FIRST, STIX-based sharing, or how to publish intelligence externally. Covers sharing models, standards, communities, and

SKILL.md

GitHub

Intelligence Sharing

Why Share?

Intelligence sharing creates a network effect — threats identified by one organisation protect the entire community. However, sharing must be governed, reciprocal, and risk-managed.

Sharing Models

1. ISACs (Information Sharing and Analysis Centers)

Sector-specific sharing communities.

ISAC Sector URL
FS-ISAC Financial Services fs-isac.com
H-ISAC Healthcare h-isac.org
IT-ISAC Technology it-isac.org
E-ISAC Energy eisac.com
A-ISAC Aviation a-isac.com
Auto-ISAC Automotive automotiveisac.com

Benefits: Sector-relevant intelligence, trusted community, pre-vetted members, established TLP norms.

2. FIRST (Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams)

Global incident response community. Membership-based, includes national CERTs and enterprise security teams.

Sharing via: FIRST mailing lists, TF-CSIRT community, CTI SIG.

3. MISP (Malware Information Sharing Platform)

Open-source threat intelligence platform for sharing IOCs and threat data.

How to share via MISP:

  1. Create an event with appropriate distribution
  2. Add attributes (IOCs) with correct types
  3. Tag with TLP, ATT&CK techniques, and galaxies
  4. Set distribution: Organisation only / Community / Connected communities / All
  5. Publish event

4. STIX/TAXII (Automated Sharing)

Standards for structured intelligence exchange.

  • STIX 2.1: Format for representing intelligence (see stix-bundle skill)
  • TAXII 2.1: Transport protocol for exchanging STIX bundles

TAXII channels:

  • Collections: Server-hosted repositories of STIX objects
  • Channels: Push-based distribution
  • API roots: Discovery endpoints

5. Bilateral/Multilateral Sharing

Direct sharing with trusted partners under agreed terms.

Requirements:

  • Sharing agreement (legal framework)
  • TLP adherence by both parties
  • Secure communication channel
  • Reciprocity expectation

TLP and Sharing

TLP Sharing Scope Automated Sharing?
RED Named recipients only No
AMBER+STRICT Own organisation No
AMBER Organisation + need-to-know Restricted TAXII
GREEN Community ISAC portals, MISP community
CLEAR Unrestricted Public TAXII feeds, blogs

What to Share

Do Share

  • IOCs from confirmed incidents (with context)
  • TTPs observed in your environment
  • Detection rules that work
  • Vulnerability intelligence relevant to sector
  • Anonymised incident lessons learned

Don't Share

  • Source-identifying information without source consent
  • Victim-identifying information without victim consent
  • Raw internal telemetry or logs
  • Information that reveals your security posture
  • Speculation presented as intelligence

Sharing Quality

Shared intelligence should meet the same quality standards as internal products:

  • Source assessment (Admiralty Scale)
  • Confidence levels
  • MITRE ATT&CK mapping
  • Proper TLP marking
  • Context (not just raw IOCs — explain what they mean)

The number one complaint about shared intelligence: "Just IOCs with no context." Always share the WHY alongside the WHAT.

Legal Considerations

  • Comply with data protection regulations (GDPR, sector-specific rules)
  • Ensure sharing agreements cover liability
  • TLP is a trust agreement, not a legal framework — complement with contracts
  • Be aware of export control regulations for certain technical intelligence
  • Document all sharing decisions for audit trail