Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 21, 2023. It is now read-only.

cidr_match in lookup tables #246

Open
brucegivens opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

cidr_match in lookup tables #246

brucegivens opened this issue Feb 9, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@brucegivens
Copy link

It would be useful to have the ability to perform a cidr_match on the keys of a lookup table.

The goal would be to look up a specific IP in a list of subnets and have the column(s) for the subnet to which that IP belongs returned.

For example, looking up 192.168.7.3 against the following CSV would return 'office':

"subnet","subnet_name"
"192.168.0.0/16","office"
"10.10.10.0/24","datacenter1"
"10.10.20.0/24","datacenter2"

Currently, a 1:1 match is required for the key such that the subnet would have to be known before the lookup could be performed.

For reference, the Graylog Community thread: https://community.graylog.org/t/mapping-ips-to-subnets/4083

It may also be a solution to use a custom MaxMind DB for this as described here: https://blog.maxmind.com/2015/09/29/building-your-own-mmdb-database-for-fun-and-profit/

But it appears as if Graylog can only use the predefined City and Country MMDB formats for a data adapter.

@florianpopp florianpopp added this to the 3.0.0 milestone Feb 22, 2018
@bernd bernd removed this from the 3.0.0 milestone Nov 16, 2018
@jalogisch
Copy link

he @brucegivens

if you use the processing pipelines for the GEO IP Lookup - with your custom database, you would be able to access that information you add yourself.

Please see how to-do this in this posting: https://blog.reconinfosec.com/geolocation-in-graylog/

With that and your custom DB you would be able to access the information.

@brucegivens
Copy link
Author

Hmm, interesting idea - I'll give it a whirl, will take some time before I'll be able to look into it, though.
Thanks for the input!

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants