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

MEDIUM: site: add attack_threshold+immediate_block #210

Merged

Conversation

daniel-corbett
Copy link
Collaborator

@daniel-corbett daniel-corbett commented Jan 3, 2024

This commit brings in the latest improvements that are in go-sigsci 0.1.19 (to be released), which allows for updating the attack thresholds and/or setting the immediate block functionality.

attack_threshold can be set multiple times each for the various intervals: 1, 10, 60 (in minutes).

immediate_block is a bool, which will instruct the WAF to immediately block requests with attack signals.

This commit depends on signalsciences/go-sigsci#59 as well as a new version being issued.

This commit brings in the latest improvements that are in go-sigsci
0.1.19 (to be released), which allows for updating the attack thresholds
and/or setting the immediate block functionality.

attack_threshold can be set multiple times each for the various
intervals: 1, 10, 60 (in minutes).

immediate_block is a bool, which will instruct the WAF to immediately
block requests with attack signals.

This commit depends on go-sigsci#59 as well as a new version being
issued.
@shawnps
Copy link
Collaborator

shawnps commented Jan 5, 2024

@daniel-corbett I tagged and released go-sigsci v0.1.19 👍

Could you run a couple of commands and push up the results?

go mod tidy
terraform fmt main.tf

@daniel-corbett
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Could you run a couple of commands and push up the results?

Done both - still seeing errors in the validation. Is there something else that needs to be done?

@shawnps
Copy link
Collaborator

shawnps commented Jan 10, 2024

@daniel-corbett the problem is likely that the build is installing v2.1.5 which fails to validate because it doesn't contain your resource changes.

We'll probably need to update the build to use the version of the provider from the current branch, rather than the registry.

@daniel-corbett
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@shawnps - i think i fixed it.

@shawnps
Copy link
Collaborator

shawnps commented Jan 11, 2024

Thanks @daniel-corbett -- LGTM

@shawnps shawnps merged commit 4079181 into signalsciences:main Jan 11, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants