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/20220825/v9 #7767

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Aug 26, 2022
Merged

Next/20220825/v9 #7767

merged 17 commits into from
Aug 26, 2022

Conversation

catenacyber and others added 17 commits August 22, 2022 17:32
As an SMB2 async response does not have a tree id, even if
the request has it.

Per spec, MessageId should be enough to identifiy a message request
and response uniquely across all messages that are sent on the same
SMB2 Protocol transport connection.
So, the tree id is redundant anyways.

Ticket: OISF#5508
Protocol change can fail if one protocol change is already
occuring.

Ticket: OISF#5509
Bumps [actions/cache](https://github.com/actions/cache) from 3.0.7 to 3.0.8.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/actions/cache/releases)
- [Changelog](https://github.com/actions/cache/blob/main/RELEASES.md)
- [Commits](actions/cache@a7c34ad...fd5de65)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: actions/cache
  dependency-type: direct:production
  update-type: version-update:semver-patch
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Signed-off-by: jason taylor <jtfas90@gmail.com>
When building with the following options:

 ./configure CC=clang --enable-luajit --enable-geoip --enable-unittests

There is a build failure:

runmode-unittests.c:234:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'LuajitSetupStatesPool' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
    if (LuajitSetupStatesPool() != 0) {
A Packet may be dropped due to several different reasons. This change
adds action as a parameter, so we can update the packet action when we
drop it, instead of setting it to drop.

Related to
Bug OISF#5458
Bug 5458 states that the reject action is no longer working. While SV
tests that use the reject action still pass, it indeed seems that a
regression has happened with commit aa93984, because while the
function that applies rule actions to the flow (RuleActionToFlow) does
check for the reject action, the newly added function PacketApply
SignatureActions only checks for ACTION_DROP or ACTION_PASS when
deciding to call RuleActionToFlow.

Bug OISF#5458
Add unittests to check that packet flags are correctly updated after
detection finds drop or reject rules that match.

Related to
Bug OISF#5458
StreamTcpRegisterTests was being declared twice.
With the recent changes, these macros weren't being used anymore.

Related to
Bug OISF#5458
Suricata can indeed pipeline many HTTP1 transactions
So as to avoid fuzzing detecting protocol polyglots with enip
As context id is used to know to which variant of the endpoint the
request is done, it is interesting to parse it.

Feature OISF#5413.
When doing a DCERPC request, we can use the context id to log the
interface that is used. Doing that we can see in one single event
what is the DCERPC interface and opnum that are used. This allows
to have all the information needed to resolve the request to a
function call.

Feature OISF#5413.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 25, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #7767 (2cc9152) into master (9353b07) will increase coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 86.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7767      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.98%   76.06%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         661      662       +1     
  Lines      185764   185789      +25     
==========================================
+ Hits       141152   141322     +170     
+ Misses      44612    44467     -145     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 60.94% <54.54%> (+0.11%) ⬆️
suricata-verify 52.55% <69.23%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
unittests 60.70% <72.72%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

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

@suricata-qa
Copy link

Information:

ERROR: QA failed on ips_afp_drop_chk.

field test baseline %
ips_afp_stats_chk
.flow.end.state.new 18152 10800 168.07%
.flow.end.tcp_liberal 120176 108000 111.27%
.tcp.reassembly_gap 143117 108000 132.52%
generic_stats_chk
.capture.kernel_drops 6893567 5654519 121.91%
.flow.end.state.new 22647 14867 152.33%
.flow.end.tcp_state.syn_sent 2395 183 1308.74%
.flow.end.tcp_liberal 104229 90436 115.25%
.tcp.segment_memcap_drop 908 11729 7.74%
.tcp.reassembly_gap 183309 114099 160.66%
.tcp.insert_data_normal_fail 772 11358 6.8%
.app_layer.error.http.parser 88 55 160.0%
.app_layer.error.smtp.gap 115 61 188.52%
.app_layer.error.tls.gap 73796 60833 121.31%

Pipeline 8777
WARNING: THERE IS A KNOWN BAD BASELINE WITH PACKET DROPS. bE MINDFUL OF ANY RESULTS.

@victorjulien victorjulien mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2022
@victorjulien victorjulien merged commit 2cc9152 into OISF:master Aug 26, 2022
@victorjulien victorjulien deleted the next/20220825/v9 branch September 19, 2022 07:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
6 participants