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

[Auditbeat] Sort IPv4 addresses before IPv6 #9953

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 10, 2019

Conversation

cwurm
Copy link
Contributor

@cwurm cwurm commented Jan 8, 2019

At the moment, IP addresses collected from a network interfaces have no specific order. What can happen is that even though an interface has both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, the IPv6 address might be returned first. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the message string, e.g.: "message": "Host vagrant-2016 (IP: 10.0.2.15) restarted". The IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

@cwurm cwurm added review needs_backport PR is waiting to be backported to other branches. Auditbeat SecOps labels Jan 8, 2019
@cwurm cwurm requested a review from a team as a code owner January 8, 2019 16:55
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/secops

Copy link
Contributor

@adriansr adriansr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@cwurm cwurm merged commit 204264a into elastic:master Jan 10, 2019
cwurm pushed a commit to cwurm/beats that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2019
Changes the `host` dataset to sort IPv4 addresses of a network interface before IPv6 addresses. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the `message` string, and the IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

(cherry picked from commit 204264a)
@cwurm cwurm added v6.7.0 and removed needs_backport PR is waiting to be backported to other branches. labels Jan 10, 2019
cwurm pushed a commit to cwurm/beats that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2019
Changes the `host` dataset to sort IPv4 addresses of a network interface before IPv6 addresses. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the `message` string, and the IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

(cherry picked from commit 204264a)
@cwurm cwurm added the v6.6.0 label Jan 10, 2019
cwurm pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2019
)

Changes the `host` dataset to sort IPv4 addresses of a network interface before IPv6 addresses. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the `message` string, and the IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

(cherry picked from commit 204264a)
@cwurm cwurm removed the v6.7.0 label Jan 10, 2019
cwurm pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2019
)

Changes the `host` dataset to sort IPv4 addresses of a network interface before IPv6 addresses. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the `message` string, and the IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

(cherry picked from commit 204264a)
leweafan pushed a commit to leweafan/beats that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2023
…) (elastic#9991)

Changes the `host` dataset to sort IPv4 addresses of a network interface before IPv6 addresses. This matters because the first IP address of the first non-loopback interface will be used in the `message` string, and the IPv4 address (if it exists) should be easier to read and the more "expected" one for the user.

(cherry picked from commit 7eac35b)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants