As the terrain of cybersecurity evolves, a significant issue has emerged: the inconsistent naming of threat actor groups by various cybersecurity firms. This confusion stems from the fact that different organizations often track the same malicious groups under different names, like Midnight Blizzard, as well known as Cozy Bear or APT29. This inconsistency can lead to considerable delays in response to cyber threats as analysts struggle to align the various references.
Historical context reveals that naming conventions in cybersecurity have long been controversial, often mythologizing the capabilities of these actors. As a result, the need for a streamlined and standardized naming system is apparent, as it could greatly improve clarity and coordination among security professionals. Adversary group naming is fundamental in cybersecurity for harm reduction.
The controversial naming conventions in cybersecurity highlight the urgent need for a standardized system to enhance clarity and coordination among professionals.
Recognizing this pressing issue, Microsoft and CrowdStrike have recently initiated a collaborative initiative aimed at reconciling their differing threat actor taxonomies. This partnership seeks to map over 80 threat actors, effectively reducing confusion across the industry. Improved coordination leads to enhanced overall security posture.
Despite their collaboration, the companies plan to retain their individual naming systems. This dual approach permits each firm to communicate effectively with its stakeholders without altering the perception of the threat actors’ capabilities. The goal is to simplify identification and improve the speed of response during cyber incidents—critical factors in cybersecurity.
The challenges presented by naming inconsistencies are compounded by historical shifts in naming themes. For instance, the change from earth-themed names to weather-related designations creates additional layers of confusion. Analysts often encounter multiple names for the same actor, which directly impacts their confidence in attribution and response. Therefore, establishing a standard could not only improve response time but also strengthen overall security posture.
Moreover, standardized naming improves collaboration and information sharing among security teams. By reducing confusion, professionals can make quicker decisions, eventually fortifying defenses against increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks.
