-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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 bidir 5665 v11 #11246
Detect bidir 5665 v11 #11246
Conversation
Ticket: 5665 This is done with `alert ip any any => any any` The => operator means that we will need both directions
By using keywords bidir.toclient and bidir.toserver, the following keywords are forced to the direction even if they can match on both directions. Ticket: 5665
Do not require a rule to use bidir.toserver after the usage of bidir.toclient for unambiguous keywords, where the rule writer does not want to explicit the redundant direction.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #11246 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.99% 83.00% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 942 942
Lines 249358 249510 +152
==========================================
+ Hits 206951 207112 +161
+ Misses 42407 42398 -9
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
Information: QA ran without warnings. Pipeline 20971 |
src/detect-engine-state.c
Outdated
s->dir_state[i].filestore_cnt = 0; | ||
s->dir_state[i].flags = 0; | ||
/* reset 'cur' back to the list head */ | ||
s->dir_state[i].cur = s->dir_state[0].head; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
dir_state[i]
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the detail, nice catch.
Hope to read something more about the overview of this PR ;-)
Try to look at |
Information: QA ran without warnings. Pipeline 21010 |
Continued in #11293 |
Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/5665
Describe changes:
SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#1889
Draft again because of second commit
General feedback expected :-)
TODO :
bidir.toclient
?@victorjulien is there now a protocol with bidirectional frames ? (Enip rust has it in #11184)
#10904 rebased with some new test in SV