-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.3k
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
[SIEM][Detections] Prevent removal of actions via the UI from breaking rule AAD #68184
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This fixes elastic#64870 _for real_. The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a meta.kibana_siem_app_url field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that field was _also_ removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution. This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround.
rylnd
added
Team:SIEM
v8.0.0
release_note:skip
Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes
v7.8.0
v7.9.0
v7.7.2
labels
Jun 3, 2020
FrankHassanabad
approved these changes
Jun 4, 2020
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.
LGTM
Pinging @elastic/siem (Team:SIEM) |
💚 Build SucceededHistory
To update your PR or re-run it, just comment with: |
2 tasks
This was referenced Jun 4, 2020
rylnd
added a commit
to rylnd/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2020
…#68184) This fixes elastic#64870 _for real_. The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a meta.kibana_siem_app_url field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that field was _also_ removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution. This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround. # Conflicts: # x-pack/plugins/security_solution/public/alerts/components/rules/step_rule_actions/index.tsx # x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/lib/detection_engine/rules/update_rules_notifications.ts
rylnd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2020
…#68300) This fixes #64870 _for real_. The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a meta.kibana_siem_app_url field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that field was _also_ removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution. This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround. # Conflicts: # x-pack/plugins/security_solution/public/alerts/components/rules/step_rule_actions/index.tsx # x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/lib/detection_engine/rules/update_rules_notifications.ts
rylnd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2020
…#68299) This fixes #64870 _for real_. The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a meta.kibana_siem_app_url field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that field was _also_ removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution. This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround.
rylnd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 9, 2020
…#68681) This fixes #64870 _for real_. The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a meta.kibana_siem_app_url field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that field was _also_ removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution. This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround.
MindyRS
added
the
Team: SecuritySolution
Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc.
label
Sep 23, 2021
Pinging @elastic/security-solution (Team: SecuritySolution) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
release_note:skip
Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes
Team: SecuritySolution
Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc.
Team:SIEM
v7.7.2
v7.8.0
v7.9.0
v8.0.0
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This fixes #64870 for realsies.
The issue ended up being caused by a conditional form field that mapped to a nested field on the rule's params: when a rule is created with an action, it has a
meta.kibana_siem_app_url
field. When the rule's actions were removed via the UI, that form field was also removed, which broke AAD and thus rule execution.This fixes the issue by making that field unconditional, and also removes the previous workaround.
Testing this requires interacting with both the UI and task manager. I have not written an automated regression test, and I don't believe our cypress tests currently exercise rule execution. However, we've also created #68179 to discuss the AAD issue in general and how best to protect API users from encountering it. Adding a (currently failing) integration test there seems most appropriate.
For maintainers