Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

detect: allow rule which need both directions to match #10199

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/5665

Describe changes:

  • allows bidirectional signature matching ! POC
SV_BRANCH=pr/1591

OISF/suricata-verify#1591

Draft: to show POC and get feedback.
Throw me rules examples ! negative and positive...
Maybe this works so far because of tx progress between request and response for HTTP

TODO :

  • more tests !!!!
  • doc !
  • Are there protocols/transactions where server speaks first and we want bidirectional rule on it ?
  • think about solution for ambiguous-direction keywords (like new to_client and to_server keywords that are not in flow keyword, but only apply to a previous keyword)

#10194 with

  • scan-build/memory leak fix
  • fast pattern handling
  • usage of =>

Ticket: 5665

This is done with `alert ip any any => any any`
The => operator means that we will need both directions
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 3 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (6896a93) 82.12% compared to head (f94624f) 82.15%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10199      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.12%   82.15%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         975      975              
  Lines      271724   271777      +53     
==========================================
+ Hits       223151   223268     +117     
+ Misses      48573    48509      -64     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 62.78% <24.07%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
suricata-verify 61.43% <94.44%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
unittests 62.83% <16.66%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@suricata-qa
Copy link

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline 17621

@catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor Author

Replaced by #10209

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants