PacketFence - BTS - PacketFence
View Issue Details
0000801PacketFencepublic2009-09-15 09:562011-01-26 15:43
obilodeau 
obilodeau 
highmajorN/A
closedfixed 
 
 
0000801: violation add should check for whitelist / trappable IP or MAC / etc.
Right now, each time we call `pfcmd violation add` we verify before hand if it is whitelisted, trappable or not, etc.

This code is repeated every time and should be placed in the violation class to avoid repeat.

What happened is that right now, vendormac and useragent violations do not do these tests before because I didn't knew about that when I implemented the features.

Heck even an integration test should be done on that.
No tags attached.
Issue History
2009-09-15 09:56obilodeauNew Issue
2009-09-15 09:56obilodeauStatusnew => assigned
2009-09-15 09:56obilodeauAssigned To => obilodeau
2009-09-25 18:28obilodeauNote Added: 0001314
2009-09-25 18:28obilodeauPrioritynormal => high
2009-09-25 18:28obilodeauSeverityminor => major
2009-10-09 11:23obilodeauNote Added: 0001320
2009-10-09 11:35obilodeauNote Added: 0001321
2009-10-09 11:35obilodeauStatusassigned => resolved
2009-10-09 11:35obilodeauResolutionopen => fixed
2011-01-26 15:43obilodeauStatusresolved => closed

Notes
(0001314)
obilodeau   
2009-09-25 18:28   
increasing severity since this bypass expected behavior on new alarm types
(0001320)
obilodeau   
2009-10-09 11:23   
Validation will be done with violation_trigger, when you call pfcmd add (like the web interface does) this doesn't deal with validation. We decided that it is what makes more sense right now.
(0001321)
obilodeau   
2009-10-09 11:35   
fix in monotone's rev: cf8fddeefc692d98c4f5d5c381d8c0bfeed532f6
http://mtn.inverse.ca/revision/info/cf8fddeefc692d98c4f5d5c381d8c0bfeed532f6 [^]