[Security Solution] UI copy for Upgrade rules confirmation modal

[maximpn]

Summary

Updates texts according to the suggested UI copy (source doc).

Screenshots

Update All rules:

Single rule with solvable conflicts:

Multiple rules with solvable conflicts:

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with solvable conflicts:

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with non-solvable conflicts:

Only rules with conflicts:

Mix of rules selected to update:

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/security-detections-response (Team:Detections and Resp)

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/security-solution (Team: SecuritySolution)

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/security-detection-rule-management (Team:Detection Rule Management)

[nikitaindik]

Maybe it's just me, but imo it's not clear what will happen once I click Update rules.

In this case I have 1048 rules, of which:

• 1020 are conflict-free
• 27 have unresolved conflicts
• 1 has auto-resolved conflicts

Clicking "Update rules" will update rules without conflicts + rules with auto-resolved conflicts. Should we be more explicit about it in the description? Maybe something like:

Click Update rules without conflicts to update the 1020 conflict-free rules.
Click Update rules to update the 1020 conflict-free rules and 1 rule with auto-resolved conflict.

@nastasha-solomon wdyt?

[nikitaindik]

Should it be its conflicts if it's a single rule or is their conflicts applicable to both single and plural? @nastasha-solomon

[nikitaindik]

Here and in other places where this sentence is used

[nastasha-solomon]

The former (its conflicts) is more accurate if you're describing a single rule with an unresolved conflict.

[nikitaindik]

@maximpn @nastasha-solomon I have reviewed the changes and left a couple of minor remarks. Please take a look and update the copy if it makes sense to you.

I also tested the changes locally and can confirm that all the combinations of rules with different conflict states show appropriate modals under Enterprise/Complete license. 👍 Under the Basic/Essentials license rules are updated to target without showing modals to user.

Approving.

[nastasha-solomon]

Hey, @maximpn - I provided some suggestions and notes below. Hope they're helpful and thanks for all of your work on this!

Update All rules:

I liked @nikitaindik's suggestion here and have a few additional suggestions to tighten the message:

Exclude rules with conflicts?

X of the X selected rules have conflicts. To safely update the X rules with auto-resolved conflicts, we recommend addressing the conflicts from the rule update flyout. The X rules with unresolved conflicts cannot be bulk-updated until you manually fix them.

Click Update rules without conflicts to update the X conflict-free rules.
Click Update rules to update the X conflict-free rules and X rules with auto-resolved conflicts.

Single rule with solvable conflicts:

Looks good!

Multiple rules with solvable conflicts:

Looks good!

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with solvable conflicts:

The second sentence and last sentence are related, so it'd be good to place them closer together. The ordering and numbers seems a little disjointed as well. Here's a slightly re-organized version:

Exclude rules with conflicts?

X of the X selected rules have auto-resolved conflicts. To safely update them, we recommend addressing the conflicts from the rule update flyout.

Click Update rules without conflicts to update the X conflict-free rules.
Click Update rules to update the X conflict-free rules and X rules with auto-resolved conflicts.

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with non-solvable conflicts:

X of the X selected rules have unresolved conflicts, which cannot be bulk-updated until you manually fix them.

Click Update rules without conflicts to update the X conflict-free rules.

Only rules with conflicts:

I need more information on the example screenshots. They look similar to the screenshots for "Multiple rules with solvable conflicts".

Mix of rules selected to update:

Exclude rules with conflicts?

X of the X selected rules have conflicts. To safely update the X rules with auto-resolved conflicts, we recommend addressing the conflicts from the rule update flyout. The X rules with unresolved conflicts cannot be bulk-updated until you manually fix them.

Click Update rules without conflicts to update the X conflict-free rules.
Click Update rules to update the X conflict-free rules and X rules with auto-resolved conflicts.

[maximpn]

@nastasha-solomon,

I've updated texts according to your suggestions. Could you have a look?

Update All rules:

Single rule with solvable conflicts:

Looks good!

Stayed unchanged.

Multiple rules with solvable conflicts:

Looks good!

Stayed unchanged.

Only rules with conflicts:

I need more information on the example screenshots. They look similar to the screenshots for "Multiple rules with solvable conflicts".

In this case user selects only rules with conflicts. Compared to "Multiple rules with solvable conflicts" there are both conflict types (auto-resolved and unresolved conflicts) in the selected rules.

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with solvable conflicts:

Mix of conflict-free rules and rules with non-solvable conflicts:

Mix of rules selected to update:

[banderror]

@maximpn @nastasha-solomon @nikitaindik

The most recent copies look great and I'm totally fine with merging the PR as is. Just a few suggestions to think about:

• The modal can look quite differently depending on what rules are selected. This requires quite a bit of code to be written and maintained just to render the modal properly. Maybe we could try to come up with a modal template that would have less variation. For example, first we list all the numbers, then we explain that rules with unresolved conflicts can't be bulk upgraded, then we explain that it's risky to upgrade rules with auto-resolved conflicts and we don't recommend this, etc. If there are no rules with unresolved conflicts, we just fill the corresponding placeholders in the modal template with an empty space. Same for auto-resolved conflicts and non-conflicting rules. I hope this can make the look-and-feel of the modal consistent and the code implementing it will be simpler.
• I would like the modal to really stress out that it's risky to bulk upgrade rules with auto-resolved conflicts and we don't recommend this. Currently, this warning is lost among all the other text. This is the most important message in this whole modal and the primary reason why we show it in the first place. How can we make this warning more visible?

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

• Buildkite Build
• Commit: b09ccdc

Metrics [docs]

Async chunks

Total size of all lazy-loaded chunks that will be downloaded as the user navigates the app

id	before	after	diff
securitySolution	8.9MB	8.9MB	+1.7KB

History

• 💔 Build #283304 failed d14c674
• 💔 Build #282920 failed b53e760

cc @maximpn

[kibanamachine]

Starting backport for target branches: 8.18, 8.x, 9.0

https://github.com/elastic/kibana/actions/runs/13842146815

[kibanamachine]

💚 All backports created successfully

Status	Branch	Result
✅	8.18
✅	8.x
✅	9.0

Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI.

Questions ?

Please refer to the Backport tool documentation