From 934edfd61835127df82c0e4e2f92c8993f7506e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Ibarra <16747370+brokensound77@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 10:46:38 -0900
Subject: [PATCH] Add the Zen of Security Rules to philosophy (#3437)

(cherry picked from commit 298d1bce0d6d295a390cf68e5e4983ad48760f5a)
---
 PHILOSOPHY.md | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/PHILOSOPHY.md b/PHILOSOPHY.md
index 123d60e35..cf6c9ba96 100644
--- a/PHILOSOPHY.md
+++ b/PHILOSOPHY.md
@@ -2,6 +2,10 @@
 
 Rule development can be hotly debated and there are many ideas for what makes a detection rule *good*. We hear about arguments between *Indicators of Compromise* vs. *Indicators of Attack* and *signatures* vs. *rules*. Instead of boring ourselves with those re-hashed discussions, we want to share our approach for rule writing and our expectations of this repository.
 
+### The Zen of Security Rules
+
+We incorporate the [Zen of Security Rules](https://zenofsecurity.io/rules) into all of our rule development and planning. We strive to follow these principles to ensure practical rule design for resiliency at scale. 
+
 
 ## Approach