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

detect/proto/v3: remove unittests #6857

Closed

Conversation

TheKharleeci
Copy link
Contributor

@TheKharleeci TheKharleeci commented Jan 24, 2022

Make sure these boxes are signed before submitting your Pull Request -- thank you.

Link to redmine ticket: https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/4911

Previous PR: #6828

Describe changes:

  • remove unittest that has been converted to Suricata-Verify

suricata-verify-pr: 677

This test is reimplemented in Suricata-Verify

Task: 4911
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 24, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #6857 (ef7eef4) into master (0bf1227) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6857      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.68%   77.68%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         628      628              
  Lines      187254   187232      -22     
==========================================
- Hits       145473   145448      -25     
- Misses      41781    41784       +3     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 57.71% <ø> (ø)
suricata-verify 53.54% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 62.83% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Copy link
Member

@inashivb inashivb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Thanks! :)

@victorjulien victorjulien mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2022
@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Merged in #6861, thanks!

victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request May 13, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

It is internally stored as "=,255", but has some special case handling
in the `DetectIPRepMatch` function.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request May 16, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

It is internally stored as "=,255", but has some special case handling
in the `DetectIPRepMatch` function.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Jun 6, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

Internally it is implemented outside the uint support.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Jun 15, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

Internally it is implemented outside the uint support.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

Internally it is implemented outside the uint support.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
(cherry picked from commit 83976a4)
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Jul 5, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

Internally it is implemented outside the uint support.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
(cherry picked from commit 83976a4)
victorjulien added a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Jul 7, 2024
Implement special "isset" and "isnotset" modes.

"isset" matches if an IP address is part of an iprep category with any
value.

It is internally implemented as ">=,0", which should always be true if
there is a value to evaluate, as valid reputation values are 0-127.

"isnotset" matches if an IP address is not part of an iprep category.

Internally it is implemented outside the uint support.

Ticket: OISF#6857.
(cherry picked from commit 83976a4)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants