-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 449
feat(events): create tracee_info event #4166
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
feat(events): create tracee_info event #4166
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
|
||
## Arguments | ||
|
||
* `boot_time`:`u64`[U] - the boot time of the system Tracee run in since epoch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
* `boot_time`:`u64`[U] - the boot time of the system Tracee run in since epoch. | |
* `boot_time`:`u64`[U] - the boot time of the system that Tracee is running on, relative to the Unix epoch. |
@yanivagman @rscampos Doesn't this fit the datastore framework much more? Static data which should be accessible over time shouldn't be exposed as a transient event. As this data fits under the |
The first reason for creating this event is to be used by the file source (aka "analyze mode"). Since we only expose events in the output file, I don't think data store would fit for this purpose |
I think we should invest in a more robust way to convert datastores in general into sources for the analyze mode in this case, rather than adding directly as a pipeline event (although it could be a solution that datastores emit events). An example for such a design could be that each datastore would implement a "commitlog" interface. So changes can only be done through commits, which the datastore needs to keep track of (if its designed to be used in analyze mode later - maybe some datastore authors in plugins will not have this intention). Then, we could set a flag that dumps the commit-log after tracee's run. Maybe we would have |
Create an event that export Tracee's data upon startup. Co-authored-by: Alon Zivony <alon.zivony@aquasec.com>
b78524b
to
5c02ebf
Compare
I agree that we should invest in data stores and to keep its state for later analysis. This will require a careful design and implementation though. So for now, I think we can continue with the approach of having the "tracee_info" event, which can also signal the start of the event stream (thus it can be seen as an event on its own) |
fix: #4174
1. Explain what the PR does
5c02ebf feat(events): create tracee_info event
2. Explain how to test it
3. Other comments
Credits to @AlonZivony, who did the work.