doc: add missing rule to engine-analysis section - v1#8989
Closed
jufajardini wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
The first report didn't have an example rule to go with.
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #8989 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.41% 82.42% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 969 969
Lines 273556 273556
==========================================
+ Hits 225442 225480 +38
+ Misses 48114 48076 -38
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
victorjulien
approved these changes
Jun 8, 2023
Merged
Member
|
Merged in #8994, thanks! |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I was checking the documentation for engine analysis, and noticed that the first example was missing the accompanying rule that should be associated with it.
I checked the suricata-verify repo and found a rule that seemed to be a good match for it, so cleaned it up and added it to the section.