README.md

   1 Suricata
   2 ========
   3
   4 [![Fuzzing Status](https://oss-fuzz-build-logs.storage.googleapis.com/badges/suricata.svg)](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/list?sort=-opened&can=1&q=proj:suricata)
   5
   6 Introduction
   7 ------------
   8
   9 Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine.
  10
  11
  12 Installation
  13 ------------
  14
  15 https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/projects/suricata/wiki/Suricata_Installation
  16
  17 User Guide
  18 ----------
  19
  20 You can follow the [Suricata user guide](https://suricata.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) to get started.
  21
  22 Our deprecated (but still useful) user guide is also [available](https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/projects/suricata/wiki/Suricata_User_Guide).
  23
  24
  25 Contributing
  26 ------------
  27
  28 We're happily taking patches and other contributions. Please see https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/projects/suricata/wiki/Contributing for how to get started.
  29
  30 Suricata is a complex piece of software dealing with mostly untrusted input. Mishandling this input will have serious consequences:
  31
  32 * in IPS mode a crash may knock a network offline;
  33 * in passive mode a compromise of the IDS may lead to loss of critical and confidential data;
  34 * missed detection may lead to undetected compromise of the network.
  35
  36 In other words, we think the stakes are pretty high, especially since in many common cases the IDS/IPS will be directly reachable by an attacker.
  37
  38 For this reason, we have developed a QA process that is quite extensive. A consequence is that contributing to Suricata can be a somewhat lengthy process.
  39
  40 On a high level, the steps are:
  41
  42 1. Travis-CI based build & unit testing. This runs automatically when a pull request is made.
  43
  44 2. Review by devs from the team and community
  45
  46 3. QA runs
  47
  48
  49
  50
  51 ### Overview of Suricata's QA steps
  52
  53 Trusted devs and core team members are able to submit builds to our (semi) public Buildbot instance. It will run a series of build tests and a regression suite to confirm no existing features break.
  54
  55 The final QA run takes a few hours minimally, and is started by Victor. It currently runs:
  56
  57 - extensive build tests on different OS', compilers, optimization levels, configure features
  58 - static code analysis using cppcheck, scan-build
  59 - runtime code analysis using valgrind, DrMemory, AddressSanitizer, LeakSanitizer
  60 - regression tests for past bugs
  61 - output validation of logging
  62 - unix socket testing
  63 - pcap based fuzz testing using ASAN and LSAN
  64
  65 Next to these tests, based on the type of code change further tests can be run manually:
  66
  67 - traffic replay testing (multi-gigabit)
  68 - large pcap collection processing (multi-terabytes)
  69 - fuzz testing (might take multiple days or even weeks)
  70 - pcap based performance testing
  71 - live performance testing
  72 - various other manual tests based on evaluation of the proposed changes
  73
  74
  75 It's important to realize that almost all of the tests above are used as acceptance tests. If something fails, it's up to you to address this in your code.
  76
  77
  78 One step of the QA is currently run post-merge. We submit builds to the Coverity Scan program. Due to limitations of this (free) service, we can submit once a day max.
  79 Of course it can happen that after the merge the community will find issues. For both cases we request you to help address the issues as they may come up.
  80
  81
  82
  83
  84 ### FAQ
  85
  86 __Q: Will you accept my PR?__
  87
  88 A: That depends on a number of things, including the code quality. With new features it also depends on whether the team and/or the community think the feature is useful, how much it affects other code and features, the risk of performance regressions, etc.
  89
  90
  91 __Q: When will my PR be merged?__
  92
  93 A: It depends, if it's a major feature or considered a high risk change, it will probably go into the next major version.
  94
  95
  96 __Q: Why was my PR closed?__
  97
  98 A: As documented in the Suricata Github workflow here https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/projects/suricata/wiki/Github_work_flow, we expect a new pull request for every change.
  99
 100 Normally, the team (or community) will give feedback on a pull request after which it is expected to be replaced by an improved PR. So look at the comments. If you disagree with the comments we can still discuss them in the closed PR.
 101
 102 If the PR was closed without comments it's likely due to QA failure. If the Travis-CI check failed, the PR should be fixed right away. No need for a discussion about it, unless you believe the QA failure is incorrect.
 103
 104
 105 __Q: the compiler/code analyser/tool is wrong, what now?__
 106
 107 A: To assist in the automation of the QA, we're not accepting warnings or errors to stay. In some cases this could mean that we add a suppression if the tool supports that (e.g. valgrind, DrMemory). Some warnings can be disabled. In some exceptional cases the only 'solution' is to refactor the code to work around a static code checker limitation false positive. While frustrating, we prefer this over leaving warnings in the output. Warnings tend to get ignored and then increase risk of hiding other warnings.
 108
 109
 110 __Q: I think your QA test is wrong__
 111
 112 A: If you really think it is, we can discuss how to improve it. But don't come to this conclusion too quickly, more often it's the code that turns out to be wrong.
 113
 114
 115 __Q: do you require signing of a contributor license agreement?__
 116
 117 A: Yes, we do this to keep the ownership of Suricata in one hand: the Open Information Security Foundation. See http://suricata-ids.org/about/open-source/ and http://suricata-ids.org/about/contribution-agreement/