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

[Juniper SRX] Support additional message patterns #6095

Closed
kcreddy opened this issue May 4, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6183
Closed

[Juniper SRX] Support additional message patterns #6095

kcreddy opened this issue May 4, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6183
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Integration:juniper_srx Juniper SRX

Comments

@kcreddy
Copy link
Contributor

kcreddy commented May 4, 2023

Current grok doesnt support following sample messages:

<158>May 4 05:16:01 AA1122-PR-BBBB-ABC kernel: FW: gr-0/0/0.45 A udp 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.2 49153 49153 
<158>May 4 05:16:01 AA1122-PR-BBBB-ABC-ISD (FPC Slot 1, PIC Slot 1) PFE_FW_SYSLOG_IP: FW: abcd11.21 A pim 81.2.69.142 81.2.69.143 0 0 (1 packets) 
<13>May 4 05:16:01 AA1122-PR-BBBB-ABC-ISD RT_SYSTEM: RTLOG_CONN_ERROR: Connection error SYSLOG-NG Com 57159 abort 
<30>May 4 05:16:01 AA1122-PR-BBBB-ABC-ISD rmopd[10286]: PING_TEST_COMPLETED: pingCtlOwnerIndex = HTTP_PROBE_TUNNEL_11, pingCtlTestName = TUNNEL_11  
<158>1 2023-05-04T15:21:01.102+10:00 AA1122-PR-BBBB-ABC-ISD kernel - - - FW: gr-0/0/0.14 A udp 127.0.0.1 81.2.69.142 49153 49153 

These are new message types currently not supported by the integration, and needs to be added.

@kcreddy kcreddy added enhancement New feature or request Integration:juniper_srx Juniper SRX labels May 4, 2023
@kcreddy kcreddy self-assigned this May 4, 2023
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Pinging @elastic/security-external-integrations (Team:Security-External Integrations)

@cai-elastic
Copy link

Hi @kcreddy and team,

Thank you very much for helping with the request. These samples are system event logs. The current SRX integration can parse traffic logs correctly but as you have found, some event logs cannot be parsed correctly. The custom is monitoring traffic and event logs separately. If we are going to support these event logs in SRX integration instead of Junos. Can we have a field in the pipeline to distinguish them?

Also, can you evaluate the effort and estimate the delivery timeline for us? The customer is eager to have these event logs because they are important input to some of key dashboards. Without parsing these event logs correctly, our service team cannot proceed our engagement at all. Therefore, they are requesting an urgent fix/enhancement.

Thank you very much!

Best Regards,
Cai
Snr Technical Consultant, APJ

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Integration:juniper_srx Juniper SRX
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants