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

userguide: document flow_id, with examples - v2 #9785

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jufajardini
Copy link
Contributor

Flow_id explanation expanded from version shared by Peter Manev.

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6445

Previous PR: #9784

Describe changes:

  • remove explicit attribution

Result can be seen at: https://suri-rtd-test.readthedocs.io/en/doc-flow-id-v2/output/eve/eve-json-format.html#flow-id

The example part is a bit big, but seemed to make sense that we would include at least some different event types, to illustrate the usage.

Flow_id explanation expanded from version shared by Peter Manev.

Task OISF#6445
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #9785 (2db20a0) into master (b6cd66f) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #9785      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.40%   82.40%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         968      968              
  Lines      273871   273871              
==========================================
- Hits       225695   225690       -5     
- Misses      48176    48181       +5     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 64.37% <ø> (+0.02%) ⬆️
suricata-verify 60.99% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 62.94% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

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

Copy link
Member

@inashivb inashivb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Mostly looks good. :) Some questions inline looking at it as a user.

following fileinfo, :ref:`http<eve-format-http>`, :ref:`anomaly<eve-format-anomaly>`
and :ref:`flow<eve-format-flow>` events, all easily correlated by using the ``flow_id`` EVE field::

{
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Perhaps a jq command here to get this would make sense?

"dest_port": 80
}
}
{
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we have all the events in diff boxes? They're a bit difficult to read as a big text

{"timestamp":"2009-11-24T21:27:09.534255","event_type":"TYPE", ...tuple... ,"TYPE":{ ... type specific content ... }}
{"timestamp":"2009-11-24T21:27:09.534255","flow_id":ID_NUMBER, "event_type":"TYPE", ...tuple... ,"TYPE":{ ... type specific content ... }}

Flow id
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be Flow ID or flow_id?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Important question. Looking through some other cases, I see that we have ftp_data as FTP_DATA , so I'd say it should be flow_id. Thanks!

@jufajardini
Copy link
Contributor Author

Feedback incorporated in: #9790

@jufajardini jufajardini deleted the doc-flow-id/v2 branch November 21, 2023 11:56
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.

2 participants