filters: fix event type filters #404
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
Our EventType enum numbers were being kept in sync with opcodes from the BPF side, but we were only using these to implement event type filters on tyhe protobuf side which we were matching against protobuf events anyway. We used to do this by converting to an opcode using a switch statement but this was not ideal because it was error prone and required the person adding a new event type to go into filters.go and edit the switch statement. A follow up patch (1755bc3) attempted to simplify this by using reflection but the approach was fundamentally flawed because the reflected type would always match tetragon.EventType, meaning the filters would _never_ match. Here I propose a much simpler approach. First, we change the event type enum numbers to match their oneof counterpart in the GetEventsResponse. A follow-up patch will then use these numbers to determine whether the event type actually matches. Signed-off-by: William Findlay <[email protected]>
The previous commit in this series explained how our current approach to event type filtering was totally broken. This commit rectifies the bug by simply using protobuf numbers to determine event type for filtering. Signed-off-by: William Findlay <[email protected]>
Our event type filters were broken for two months and nobody noticed, probably because we didn't really have a unit test for it. This commit adds a some simple unit tests to make sure event type filters work. Signed-off-by: William Findlay <[email protected]>
michi-covalent
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2022
|
Converting to draft while I discuss with some folks offline whether the breaking changes are worth it. |
This commit introduces two new field filters for GetEventsRequest. These allow the user to optionally specify a set of paths that should be included/excluded from the GetEventsResponse where exclusion takes precedence over inclusion. Leaving the filters empty will keep the default behaviour of including all fields in the GetEventsResponse. Filters are specified using period-separated names as they appear in protobuf JSON (i.e. lower snake case). This new filtering mechanism has several use cases, for example filtering out unwanted noisy fields from events in a customer environment or implementing functionality that transforms events for further processing (for example an event recorder that filters out noise). Signed-off-by: William Findlay <[email protected]>
jrfastab
approved these changes
Sep 15, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
CONTAINS CHANGES TO PROTOBUF API, see first commit.