Threshold flow/v8 #11029
Open
Threshold flow/v8 #11029
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add support for 'by_flow' track option. This allows using the various
threshold options in the context of a single flow.
Example:
alert tcp ... stream-event:pkt_broken_ack; \
threshold:type limit, track by_flow, count 1, seconds 3600;
The example would limit the number of alerts to once per hour for
packets triggering the 'pkt_broken_ack' stream event.
Implemented as a special "flowvar" holding the threshold entries. This
means no synchronization is required, making this a cheaper option
compared to the other trackers.
Ticket: OISF#6822.
Allow rate_filter and thresholds from the global config to specify tracking "by_flow".
Traffic variables (flowvars, flowbits, xbits, etc) use a smaller int for their type than detection types. As a workaround make sure the values fit in a uint8_t.
Limits propegation checked for DETECT_DEPTH as a content flag, which appears to have worked by chance. After reshuffling the keyword id's it no longer worked. This patch uses the proper flag DETECT_CONTENT_DEPTH.
Closed
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #11029 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 83.62% 83.66% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 922 922
Lines 250321 250392 +71
==========================================
+ Hits 209340 209479 +139
+ Misses 40981 40913 -68
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
|
Information: QA ran without warnings. Pipeline 20525 |
catenacyber
approved these changes
May 14, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the work :-)
- CI : 🟠 probably just need a rebase
- Code : Checking now
- Commits segmentation : nice, maybe the commit
detect/content: fix wrong value for depth checkshould come before the commits reordering keyword id's - Commit messages : nice
- Git ID set : looks fine for me
- CLA : you already contributed :-p
- Doc update : ok
- Redmine ticket : ok
- Rustfmt : not needed
- Tests : left some remarks there about readability, but fair enough for proving the suricata PR works
- Dependencies added: none
catenacyber
reviewed
May 14, 2024
| @@ -46,7 +47,7 @@ enum VarTypes { | |||
| }; | |||
|
|
|||
| typedef struct GenericVar_ { | |||
| uint8_t type; | |||
| uint8_t type; /**< variable type, uses detection sm_type */ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we not precise that sm_type is u16 but the order of keywords makes it sure that we fit into an u8 ?
|
Should you rebase this to get green CI ? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#1822
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6822
replacing #10910, rebasing and addressing a comment