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

Fix remote config handling for AppSec #4345

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 5, 2025
Merged

Conversation

y9v
Copy link
Member

@y9v y9v commented Feb 5, 2025

Before we were not setting apply_state to ACKNOWLEDGED on remote config content, which caused some system tests to fail.

What does this PR do?
This PR adds setting of apply_state on remote config content to ACKNOWLEDGED after successful processing.

Motivation:
Failing system tests for full denylist blocking: DataDog/system-tests#3937

Change log entry
None, this is internal change. Changes via remote config were applied before too, it's just the status that wasn't set correctly.

Additional Notes:
None.

How to test the change?
CI should be enough.

Before we were not setting `apply_state` to ACKNOWLEDGED on remote
config content.
@y9v y9v self-assigned this Feb 5, 2025
@y9v y9v requested a review from a team as a code owner February 5, 2025 11:54
@github-actions github-actions bot added the appsec Application Security monitoring product label Feb 5, 2025
@y9v y9v requested a review from a team as a code owner February 5, 2025 11:55
@datadog-datadog-prod-us1
Copy link
Contributor

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 bot commented Feb 5, 2025

Datadog Report

Branch report: appsec-fix-rc-apply-state
Commit report: d9bcea9
Test service: dd-trace-rb

✅ 0 Failed, 22079 Passed, 1476 Skipped, 5m 22.35s Total Time

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 5, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.73%. Comparing base (04cce61) to head (d9bcea9).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #4345   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.72%   97.73%           
=======================================
  Files        1368     1368           
  Lines       82998    83014   +16     
  Branches     4220     4221    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits        81113    81133   +20     
+ Misses       1885     1881    -4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Feb 5, 2025

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-02-05 14:38:12

Comparing candidate commit d9bcea9 in PR branch appsec-fix-rc-apply-state with baseline commit d0322ed in branch master.

Found 1 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 30 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

scenario:line instrumentation - targeted

  • 🟩 throughput [+8234.751op/s; +8837.551op/s] or [+5.280%; +5.667%]

Copy link
Member

@Strech Strech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have doubts about marking content as applied without actual use of it before hand.

@y9v y9v requested a review from Strech February 5, 2025 14:15
Copy link
Member

@Strech Strech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 👏🏼

@y9v y9v merged commit 0932e4a into master Feb 5, 2025
492 checks passed
@y9v y9v deleted the appsec-fix-rc-apply-state branch February 5, 2025 14:59
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 2.11.0 milestone Feb 5, 2025
SYSTEM_TESTS_REF: 239c3eba6de0473817d3d88ebbc025c9d0c9574b
# SYSTEM_TESTS_REF: main # This must always be set to `main` on dd-trace-rb's master branch
# TODO: remove this change before merging to master
SYSTEM_TESTS_REF: enable-ip-blocking-for-ruby
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Was this supposed to be removed before merge?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
appsec Application Security monitoring product
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants