- Does a policy/foo.bro script always load all of
policy/foo/*.bro? Would be nice if that was consistent, and
perhaps it already is.
It loads a subset that I believe are a mix between general utility and performance. More consistency would nice, but I'm not exactly sure how to get it. Any ideas?
- We should include new connection$uid into pretty much all
I'll start doing that.
- There are number of commented out "print" statements. Should we
pass this into weird.bro?
Yes, I'll do that. I forgot to go back and do something with it.
- The script activates the binpac analyzer. Do we want to remove
"classic" C++ analyzer?
The DNS analyzer would only be used if the --use-binpac flag is given to the bro binary. A long time ago I had segfaulting trouble with the DNS binpac analyzer though (which scares me a bit). We need to run it on live traffic for a while to see how it handles itself. By default the non-binpac analyzer will still be used so we should be good for the moment.
- There's a TODO about the EDNS/TSIG. What's the problem?
I've never worked with those messages (and don't really know much about them). I keep meaning to look into how to handle them but I haven't gotten to it yet.
- The reply handlers check for "ans$answer_type == DNS_ANS", but
there are also options dns_skip_all_auth/dns_skip_all_addl in
bro.init? Can we get rid of one of the two ways (I'd say the
Do you think it could cause any performance problems due to the frequently high volume of DNS traffic? I suppose that's why the variables were implemented in the first place. I do like it better with the check in the handler though. We could always pass everything through and see if anyone is having trouble with performance.
I actually just tested this a bit and my trace file a lot of DNS traffic didn't really take any longer to analyze with the auth and addl responses being passed through or not. I propose we remove all options from the analyzer related to not triggering on auth/addl RRs and handle everything at the scripting layer (it's less of a surprise that way at least).
I added a script named dns/auth-addl that adds fields to store those responses in the logs, but it doesn't currently work because there seem to be a bug with the &priority attribute on script layer defined and called events. I can't influence the order that the events are handled. I left a note in the export section of dns/base.bro that comments on what may be a part of the problem since if I define the event prototype (like in events.bif.bro), I can't handle the at all.
- The reply handlers are all almost identical. How about
refactoring that code into a function called by them all?
- The comment in connection_state_remove() seems misleading: this
is the only place that logs anything, right?
Oops, it's not supposed to be misleading. I forgot to implement the logging action once all responses have been received in addition to the final logging at state removal time.
- What is last_active used for?
Good question. It's removed now. I was thinking it would nice to know when the last response was received, but I wasn't even doing anything with it.
- Some of the types in consts.bro don't seem to be used. Do we
want to delete them?
Let's leave them, most of them are being used now.
- Can you remind me what the passive replication is for? I thought
I knew but not sure that's matching with the script.
It's to log responses received for queries (so you can see what a query resolved to at that specific time). I'm not completely happy with it yet, but if you run it you can see that it usually logs many fewer lines and the total log file size is greatly reduced as well. I don't know if it's even useful enough to include in the base distribution but I liked it because it's a good example of using the logging framework to build a new log.
- Regarding the TODO: should "recent_requests" be a table[string]
Probably, but I didn't want to suck up too much memory for that script. That's yet another one of those hairy decisions that might not work in some high volume situations.