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

next/698/20250123/v1 #12462

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Jan 24, 2025
Merged

Conversation

victorjulien and others added 17 commits January 23, 2025 19:10
In preparation of flowbit prefilter work that needs this info
earlier.

Track potential prefilter sm's to avoid unnecessary looping during
setup.
Instead of C files requiring it.
In preparation of libhtp rust, to minimize the final commit.
In preparation of libhtp rust

This occurence was missed in 23050d7
For request and response headers

In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust
ldap.request.operation matches on Lightweight Directory Access Protocol request operations
This keyword maps to the eve field ldap.request.operation
It is an unsigned 8-bit integer
Doesn't support prefiltering

Ticket: OISF#7453
ldap.responses.operation matches on Lightweight Directory Access Protocol response operations
This keyword maps to the eve field ldap.responses[].operation
It is an unsigned 8-bit integer
Doesn't support prefiltering

Ticket: OISF#7453
ldap.responses.count matches on the number of LDAP responses
This keyword maps to the eve field len(ldap.responses[])
It is an unsigned 32-bit integer
Doesn't support prefiltering

Ticket: OISF#7453
make should rerun cbindgen if cbindgen.toml is modified
Just use a regular compile time rust export, instead of having
a runtime definition through the SuricataContext structure
when compiling without unit tests
detect-transform-base64.c:47:9: warning: macro is not used [-Wunused-macros]
   47 | #define DETECT_TRANSFORM_FROM_BASE64_MODE_DEFAULT (uint8_t) Base64ModeRFC4648
Make all the hasher's have the same variants:
- add hex digest for sha256
- add finalize to hex for sha1
- add hex digest for sha1
Expose md5, sha1, and sha256 to Lua scripts with
`require("suricata.hashing")`.

Ticket: 7073
Use a single array of built-ins and provide 2 functions for
registering them:

- SCLuaLoadBuiltIn: for loading built-in modules in sandboxed
  environments.

- SCLuaRequirefBuiltIns: registers built-in modules with the standard
  package tool, allows built-ins to be loaded by output scripts that are
  not restricted

I hope to refactor the sandbox so they can use SCLuaRequirefBuiltIns
as well.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 23, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 87.81163% with 88 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.52%. Comparing base (5d9fad5) to head (d63ad75).
Report is 17 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #12462      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.63%   80.52%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         920      923       +3     
  Lines      258739   259176     +437     
==========================================
+ Hits       208643   208708      +65     
- Misses      50096    50468     +372     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 56.06% <26.08%> (-0.76%) ⬇️
livemode 19.41% <10.86%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
pcap 44.19% <23.07%> (-0.09%) ⬇️
suricata-verify 63.33% <83.55%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
unittests 58.45% <33.37%> (-0.09%) ⬇️

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

@suricata-qa
Copy link

WARNING:

field baseline test %
SURI_TLPR1_stats_chk
.uptime 629 654 103.97%

Pipeline 24338

Copy link
Contributor

@catenacyber catenacyber left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks consistent with the approved PRs, with green CI, including a good SV branch with all the tests for each approved PR...

@suricata-qa
Copy link

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline 24344

@victorjulien victorjulien deleted the next/698/20250123/v1 branch January 24, 2025 13:43
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.

5 participants