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

Elastic-ecs mapping improvements for network traffic attributes #1410

Merged
merged 61 commits into from
Apr 27, 2023

Conversation

Harmedox
Copy link
Contributor

@Harmedox Harmedox commented Mar 30, 2023

This pull request addresses issues #1407, #1408, #1409, #1412.

Harmedox and others added 30 commits February 20, 2023 07:45
"geo": {
"city_name": {
"key": "x-ecs-client.geo_city_name",
"object": "client"
"key": "x-ecs-geo.city_name",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wonder if we should just create a generic custom geography object instead of tying it to ecs. Someone else is currently working on the mappings for the log analytics connector, and there is also a need there to capture geo information.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I tend to agree. There was a comment to that effect too. We can have it mimic the properties of the Location SDO to achieve genericity and completeness.

Copy link
Member

@mdazam1942 mdazam1942 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you please update your fork while creating this pr? it shows 51 commits in the pr which suggest your fork branch is out of date.

@Harmedox Harmedox changed the base branch from develop to release/5.0.x April 10, 2023 21:02
@Harmedox Harmedox changed the base branch from release/5.0.x to develop April 10, 2023 21:02
@Harmedox
Copy link
Contributor Author

I just confirmed that my fork branch is up to date. However, it's still an error from my end as the PR is showing commits from #1378. The contribution for this PR starts from the 81d2a7a commit.

Copy link
Member

@mdazam1942 mdazam1942 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Few unittests are failing.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 26, 2023

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (develop@9f6160f). Click here to learn what that means.
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

❗ Current head 3dbc456 differs from pull request most recent head ff8cb3f. Consider uploading reports for the commit ff8cb3f to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             develop    #1410   +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage           ?   85.37%           
==========================================
  Files              ?      589           
  Lines              ?    44541           
  Branches           ?        0           
==========================================
  Hits               ?    38028           
  Misses             ?     6513           
  Partials           ?        0           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...stix_translation/test_elastic_ecs_stix_to_query.py 97.76% <100.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@delliott90 delliott90 merged commit cb03034 into opencybersecurityalliance:develop Apr 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants