Project

General

Profile

Actions

Documentation #5088

closed

Documentation #5182: userguide: better document rule keywords

file.name sticky buffer is not documented

Added by Eloy PĂ©rez about 2 years ago. Updated 20 days ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Target version:
Affected Versions:
Effort:
Difficulty:
Label:

Description

The file.name sticky buffer is not documented. It should be documented in /rules/file-keywords.html#filename as the code in detect-filename.c points, but only the keyword filename is documented.

Moreover, there should be references to this sticky buffer in all related protocols documentation where is used, in order to be easier a user to find it. The related protocols are:

  • HTTP
  • SMTP
  • FTP
  • NFS
  • SMB
  • HTTP2

Related issues 1 (1 open0 closed)

Related to Suricata - Bug #5754: I use the file-extraction to store the files transferred by HTTP2, but fileinfo does not have the filename field.NewOISF DevActions
Actions #1

Updated by Juliana Fajardini Reichow over 1 year ago

  • Parent task set to #5182
Actions #2

Updated by Jason Taylor 7 months ago

This might be completed under the PRs below?

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9327 (master)

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9361 (backport)

Actions #3

Updated by Juliana Fajardini Reichow 7 months ago

Jason Taylor wrote in #note-2:

This might be completed under the PRs below?

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9327 (master)

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9361 (backport)

I think the main part, yes. As a user, how do you feel about the request that this is referenced in the related protocols' sections, too, though?

Actions #4

Updated by Jason Taylor 7 months ago

Juliana Fajardini Reichow wrote in #note-3:

Jason Taylor wrote in #note-2:

This might be completed under the PRs below?

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9327 (master)

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9361 (backport)

I think the main part, yes. As a user, how do you feel about the request that this is referenced in the related protocols' sections, too, though?

Ah yes, good point. That would be nice to have, let me know if this is something I could submit and I can put something together (as it's currently assigned to oisf dev, I don't want to steal anyones fun :) )

JT

Actions #5

Updated by Juliana Fajardini Reichow 7 months ago

  • Assignee changed from OISF Dev to Jason Taylor
  • Target version changed from TBD to 7.0.2

Jason Taylor wrote in #note-4:

Juliana Fajardini Reichow wrote in #note-3:

Jason Taylor wrote in #note-2:

This might be completed under the PRs below?

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9327 (master)

https://github.com/OISF/suricata/pull/9361 (backport)

I think the main part, yes. As a user, how do you feel about the request that this is referenced in the related protocols' sections, too, though?

Ah yes, good point. That would be nice to have, let me know if this is something I could submit and I can put something together (as it's currently assigned to oisf dev, I don't want to steal anyones fun :) )

JT

Haha, thanks for asking, but if I recall correctly, this is the new default, to ensure tickets are not left without an assignee...
Your contributions are very welcome! I'll assign this to you, then :) :)

Actions #6

Updated by Juliana Fajardini Reichow 7 months ago

  • Status changed from New to In Review
Actions #7

Updated by Juliana Fajardini Reichow 7 months ago

  • Related to Bug #5754: I use the file-extraction to store the files transferred by HTTP2, but fileinfo does not have the filename field. added
Actions #8

Updated by Victor Julien 6 months ago

  • Target version changed from 7.0.2 to 7.0.3
Actions #9

Updated by Victor Julien 5 months ago

  • Target version changed from 7.0.3 to 8.0.0-beta1
Actions #10

Updated by Jason Taylor 4 months ago

  • Status changed from In Review to Resolved

merged PR

Actions #11

Updated by Jason Taylor 20 days ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Closed
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF