-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
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: exclude rules/evtx when target Channel
does not exists in files
#1334
Conversation
hayabusa-sample-evtx(--enable-all-rules --scan-all-evtx-files)I confirmed that there are no differences as shown below.
I would appreciate it if you could check it out when you have time🙏 |
hayabusa-sample-evtx(no option)I confirmed that only the rules that do not use
|
Channel
does not exists in files
I fixed #1334 (comment) :) baseline-evtx v8I confirmed that there are differences only for rules that do not use
and in terms of performance, there is almost no difference compared to the #1334 (comment) result.
|
I also confirmed #1334 (comment) again and there is no diff! |
@fukusuket Thanks! I updated the changelog and added a short hand option. Can you translate the Japanese changelog? (Ignore the part about |
@YamatoSecurity |
@fukusuket I took benchmarks and updated the changelog. For big scans were most .evtx files are scanned and most rules are still used, there is about a 10% performance increase. When only enabling a single rule or scanning a single file, there is a big performance increase of 60% or more. 😄 Just one thing, when scanning lots of data (130GB), it takes a while to create the rule <=> evtx mapping, so could you add a message asking the user to wait? Before:
After:
|
@YamatoSecurity |
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.
@fukusuket Looks great to me! Thanks so much for this!
What Changed
Test
baseline-evtx v8