-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
next/703/20250128/v1 #12492
next/703/20250128/v1 #12492
Conversation
If a Suricata inline IPS device is routing traffic over a non-encrypted tunnel, like IPv6 tunnels, packets in a flow will be dropped and not be matched. e.g. The following example is a Suricata inline IPS with an IPv6 tunnel: request: IPv4]ICMP] -> |IPS| -> IPv6]IPv4]ICMP] reply: <- |IPS| <- IPv6]IPv4]ICMP] Both the IPv4 request and IPv6 reply will be seen by Suricata on ingress. The flows will not be matched due to flow recursion level. Optionally use pkt recursion level in flow hash. Excluding recursion level in flow hash allows matching of packet flows and defrag on an inline IPS Suricata scenario where the IPS device is a tunnel terminator. Feature: 6260
In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust
In preparation of libhtp rust Mainly using htp_header_value_ptr and htp_header_value_len when possible
In preparation of libhtp rust Mainly adding some const
In preparation of libhtp rust
Add documentation about the rule types introduced by commit 2696fda. Add doc tags around code definitions that are referenced in the docs. Task #https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/7031
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #12492 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.55% 80.58% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 925 925
Lines 259303 259313 +10
==========================================
+ Hits 208886 208955 +69
+ Misses 50417 50358 -59
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks consistent with approved PRs, good SV branch for test, green CI
Information: QA ran without warnings. Pipeline 24392 |
Staging:
SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#2261