fix(rules): Use iin operator in LSASS memory dump via Windows Error Reporting rule#415
Merged
rabbitstack merged 1 commit intomasterfrom Jan 12, 2025
Merged
Conversation
…eporting In some occasions, the process name is reported in lower-case, avoiding the rule to match. In the same line, to improve the resilience, the create_file macro is used in the second condition to match when the WER process creates the memory dump.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What is the purpose of this PR / why it is needed?
On some occasions, the process name is reported in lowercase, preventing the rule matching. In the
Similarly, to improve resilience, the
create_filemacro is used in the second condition to match when theWERprocess creates the memory dump.What type of change does this PR introduce?
/kind bug-fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area rules
Special notes for the reviewer
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?