IntelMQ
3.5.0 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on IntelMQ's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
IntelMQ is an open-source threat intelligence processing framework that collects, normalizes, and routes security event data for incident response teams.
shodan_stream:
parameter:
alert: "<alert_id>"
generic_csv:
parameter:
copy_collector_provided_fields: true
sieve:
parameter:
script: |
if (event.get('source.ip') == $ip_list):
pass
else:
drop()
from intelmq.bots.parsers.shadowserver.config import convert_date_utc
datetime_val = convert_date_utc('2023-01-01T00:00:00')
BotTestCase.run_bot(allowed_error_count=5, allowed_warning_count=10)
intelmqdump show <message_id>
intelmqctl check
intelmqctl upgrade-config
event['extra.foo'] = 'bar'
print(event['extra.foo'])
intelmqctl run collector-sql --loglevel debug
intelmqctl check --output=json <bot_id>
Summary
IntelMQ is an open-source threat intelligence framework, free to use, that pipes security event feeds through a message queue so incidents get collected, normalized, and routed without hand-built glue code. It runs self-hosted, and bots pass JSON messages to each other while persisting state so events survive a crash instead of vanishing mid-pipeline; a RESTful API and drivers for PostgreSQL, Elasticsearch, and Splunk let it feed downstream tools. It targets CERTs, CSIRTs, SOCSOCA security operations center, the team or function that monitors threats, investigates alerts and coordinates incident response. Its work can be internal, outsourced or shared. abuse desks, and other incident-response teams rather than general security engineering. It grew out of the IHAP initiative among European CERTs, influenced by AbuseHelper though rewritten from scratch, and its own documentation describes it as a way to reduce the system-administration burden those teams otherwise carry. First committed in 2014, it has drawn 160 contributors and 95 commits in the past year, with its latest release about ten months old.
IntelMQ is an open-source threat intelligence processing framework that collects, normalizes, and routes security event data for incident response teams.
How IntelMQ helps
Which feeds have already been checked for duplicates and defanged into a consistent format before they reach my analysts?
normalizes every incoming event against a shared data harmonization ontology and forwards it as JSON, so downstream bots and analysts see one consistent shape regardless of source
Will an event get lost if a bot crashes mid-pipeline?
persists message state between bots, so a crash leaves the event queued for redelivery instead of dropping it
Where did a given malicious IP or domain get reported from, and has it already been actioned?
routes each event through collection, processing, and output bots that can be queried by ID, giving a traceable path from raw feed to stored record
How do I get incident data out of this pipeline and into my existing SIEM or database?
ships with a RESTful API and drivers for PostgreSQL, Elasticsearch, and Splunk, so events land in the tools the team already queries
Can I turn a new threat feed into a usable blacklist without writing custom glue code?
provides bot building blocks for collecting and processing feeds so a new source is wired in by configuration rather than bespoke scripts
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for IntelMQ, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail IntelMQ puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
26 entries
No entries match these filters.
- November 20251
- March 20251
- September 20241
- March 20241
- July 20231
- February 20231
- September 20211
- July 20211
- May 20211
- April 20211
- March 20212
- October 20201
- July 20201
- June 20201
- May 20201
- November 20191
- October 20192
- May 20191
- March 20191
- January 20191
- September 20181
- June 20181
- February 20181
- August 20171
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in certtools/intelmq, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 5 −7 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 2 +0 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 26% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 18 days first maintainer reply 9 hours
- Open backlog 209 of 1,284 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 209
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 1,135
- bugs 17%
- features 4%
- docs 9%
- other 70%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.
Choose a badge style and copy the code →