Handle non-exact address ranges from string. This can come directly
from user input, so here it is accepted but the address is converted
to the address range start. A warning will be issued.
Debug validation checks are added to catch this.
This issue could lead to bad input from iprep (with cidr), defrag config
and htp server personalities to produce a bad radix tree.
Bug: #5084.
Bug: #5085.
Bug: #5086.
If the ipaddress was not the address range start, it was not masked to turn
it into that. So 1.2.3.4/24 was not stored as address 1.2.3.0 with netmask 24,
but as 1.2.3.4 with netmask 24. This was then propagated into the radix tree,
where it was used as an exact key in exact lookups, giving unexpected results.
This patch implements the netmask handling for IPv4 and IPv6, and adds a set
of tests for it.
Bug: #5081.
Bug: #5066.
A bug was reported about the IP-only rules not correctly matching. This was
traced to the rules in question not getting recorded into the IP-only radix
tree correctly.
Sequence:
- 100.117.241.0/25 inserted into the tree
- 100.117.241.0/26 inserted into the tree
Both are part of the same radix node, but recorded by their different netmasks
in the user data portion.
Then faulty insert happens:
- 100.117.241.64/26
For reference, these net blocks compute to:
- 100.117.241.0/25: 100.117.241.0 - 100.117.241.127
- 100.117.241.0/26: 100.117.241.0 - 100.117.241.63
- 100.117.241.64/26: 100.117.241.64 - 100.117.241.127
The IP-only engine first does a search to get to the user data it may need to
include. It does so for with `SCRadixFindKeyIPV4ExactMatch` for single IPs, or
using `SCRadixFindKeyIPV4Netblock` in case of a netblock. Any "match" from
either of these is considered an "exact match" by the IP-only setup code.
This exact match expectation turned out to be wrong and
`SCRadixFindKeyIPV4Netblock` behaved more like "best match" instead, which is
a non-exact match, but its the next best match if no exact match is found.
The way the look up for 100.117.241.64/26 went wrong, is that it returned
the user data for 100.117.241.0/26. This happens as follows:
- first it would do an exact find, which didn't give a result
- then it removed bits from the keystream until it found a matching node
and explore if any of the netmasks it contained matched. Here the first
step of the bug started:
it considered the netmask (with user data) a match that matched the
number of bits of the matching key, but not of the actual range netmask cidr
value.
So in this case the number of shared bits between `100.117.241.0/25` and
`100.117.241.64/26` was 25, so it assumed that the user data for the
netmask 25 was the match.
To summarize this step, there are 2 problems with this:
1. it returns a match on something that isn't an exact match
2. it considered the wrong netmask value
- the radix code then took the returned node, and did the netmask check
again. This time it did use its own netmask value, so this time
it did find the netmask 26 (+ user data). However because of the node that
was returned, this netmask (+user data) belongs to `100.117.241.0`, not to
`100.117.241.64`.
- the IP-only detection code was satisfied with what it assumed to be
"exact match" and just updated the user data to include the user data that
should have been associated with `100.117.241.64/26` to `100.117.241.0/26`.
This patch addresses the issue as follows:
It makes `SCRadixFindKeyIPV4Netblock` also return an exact match by propagating
the netmask in the search and in the evaluation of the stored netmasks.
It does away with the secondary netmask (+user data) evaluation.
`SCRadixFindKeyIPV4Netblock` is expected to handle this correctly.
The IP-only engine will fall back to the "not found" path, which does an explicit
"best match" lookup and then insert a new entry into the radix tree based on
the user data of the "best match".
Issue was present for IPv6 as well.
Bug: #5066.
Instead of building a table at init just calculate it on demand.
Callsites are all during init, so its not performance critical.
Add similar function for IPv6.
This explains the frame support from the perspective of a developer,
with introductory explanation on how to add frame support to an
applayer proto.
Doc #4697
With these, the portion of code within the tags should be included
in the related code-snippets (for frame support documentation) w/o
errors, even if the code within changes. The tags can also work as
a reminder that the existing code is being shown elsewhere, so folks
know documentation might need updates, in case of major changes.
With these, the portion of code within the tags should be included
in the related code-snippets (for frame support documentation) w/o
errors, even if the code within changes. The tags can also work as
a reminder that the existing code is being shown elsewhere, so folks
know documentation might need updates, in case of major changes.
Our current rust code isn't always documentation friendly when it
comes to using code snippets. Used rustfmt to apply rust default
formatting on functions that we wanted to show in our documentation
for Frame support
When we want to share our code in our documentation pages, the current
rust formatting isn't so nice to read. Formatted just the portion of
the code that will be shown, for now.
cargo vendor has been part of the core cargo command since Rust 1.37,
and are minimum Rust version is not 1.41, so remove the check. Its
always available now.
Frames:
- sip.pdu
- sip.request_line
- sip.response_line
- sip.request_headers
- sip.response_headers
- sip.request_body
- sip.response_body
The `sip.pdu` frame is always created, the rest only if the record
parser succeeded.
Ticket: #5036.
Pierre Chifflier
Victor Julien
Juliana Fajardini
Philippe Antoine
Jason Ish
Jeff Lucovsky
Modupe Falodun
Victor Julien