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

[fortinet_fortimanager] Update an integration for syslog support #5432

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 21, 2023

Conversation

piyush-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

  • Updated data collection logic for the log data stream.
  • Updated the ingest pipeline for the log data stream.
  • Mapped fields according to the ECS schema and added Fields metadata in the appropriate yml files.
  • Updated dashboards and visualizations.
  • Updated test for pipeline for the log data stream.
  • Updated system test cases for the log data stream.

Integration release checklist

This checklist is intended for integrations maintainers to ensure consistency
when creating or updating a Package, Module or Dataset for an Integration.

All changes

  • Change follows the contributing guidelines
  • Supported versions of the monitoring target is documented
  • Supported operating systems are documented (if applicable)
  • Integration or System tests exist
  • Documentation exists
  • Fields follow ECS and naming conventions
  • At least a manual test with ES / Kibana / Agent has been performed.
  • Required Kibana version set to: ^8.3.0

New Package

  • Screenshot of the "Add Integration" page on Fleet added

Dashboards changes

  • Dashboards exists
  • Screenshots added or updated
  • Datastream filters added to visualizations

Log dataset changes

  • Pipeline tests exist (if applicable)
  • Generated output for at least 1 log file exists
  • Sample event (sample_event.json) exists

How to test this PR locally

  • Clone integrations repo.
  • Install elastic package locally.
  • Start elastic stack using elastic-package.
  • Move to integrations/packages/fortinet_fortimanager directory.
  • Run the following command to run tests.

elastic-package test

Screenshots

image
image
image

@piyush-elastic piyush-elastic requested a review from a team as a code owner March 2, 2023 14:11
@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Mar 2, 2023

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS
Pipeline View Test View Changes Artifacts preview preview

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

  • Start Time: 2023-03-16T13:43:06.159+0000

  • Duration: 17 min 55 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test Results
Failed 0
Passed 10
Skipped 0
Total 10

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

  • /test : Re-trigger the build.

@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Mar 2, 2023

🌐 Coverage report

Name Metrics % (covered/total) Diff
Packages 100.0% (1/1) 💚
Files 100.0% (1/1) 💚
Classes 100.0% (1/1) 💚
Methods 100.0% (13/13) 💚
Lines 93.382% (1157/1239)
Conditionals 100.0% (0/0) 💚

@elasticmachine
Copy link

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

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe rename this file since it is no longer generated data. Suggest name after the version of FortiOS that was the source of the events.

field: message
target_field: event.original
ignore_missing: true
- grok:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With failable processors it's helpful for debugging to include tags and include those in the appended error message. See discussion here and related proposal here. This adds human/user friendly messages and programmatically amenable tags to error.message. In this particular case it's not so crucial, but there are a few dates and several converts below that would be easier to differentiate with this approach, so I'd suggest doing it for all the failable processors here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@piyush-elastic piyush-elastic Mar 16, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@efd6, make sense will follow the same and update PR soon. Also do we have any preferred format so that we can follow consistency across all the integration. Some ideas are , consider we have 2 grok processors we can use grok_1 and grok_2 else we can use format {{processor_name_from_source_field_to_target_field}} , let me know.

@P1llus P1llus merged commit 65899bb into elastic:main Mar 21, 2023
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Package fortinet_fortimanager - 2.0.0 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=fortinet_fortimanager

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants