Skip to content
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

[AI-4595] DDS: Keycloak Integration V1.0.0 #19019

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Feb 3, 2025

Conversation

manan-crest
Copy link
Contributor

@manan-crest manan-crest commented Nov 8, 2024

What does this PR do?

PR for a new integration Keycloak 1.0.0

Additional Notes

-- OOTB detection rules JSON would be shared separately with the required teams as a part of separate repository .
-- Since during the standard attribute remapping we are not preserving the source attributes as per suggested best practices, it would result in filters using these standard attributes populating the values of other integrations as well as per current datadog behavior.

Review checklist (to be filled by reviewers)

  • Feature or bugfix MUST have appropriate tests (unit, integration, e2e)
  • Changelog entries must be created for modifications to shipped code
  • Add the qa/skip-qa label if the PR doesn't need to be tested during QA.
  • If you need to backport this PR to another branch, you can add the backport/<branch-name> label to the PR and it will automatically open a backport PR once this one is merged

@drichards-87
Copy link
Contributor

Created Jira card for Docs Team editorial review.

@drichards-87 drichards-87 added the editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review from a docs team editor label Nov 22, 2024
@iliakur
Copy link
Contributor

iliakur commented Jan 8, 2025

@thibaultkrebs 👋 could you take a peek at this again, it looks like your comment was addressed.

Copy link

@audesikorav audesikorav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see you don't use any date-remapper, this will results in a generated timestamp when the logs is received (doc). Are you sure you want that ?

otherwise I'll approve the PR

@ankitarajput-crest
Copy link
Contributor

@audesikorav Regarding your this comment,
We receive a timestamp field in our logs, and as per the documentation, this field is automatically remapped during the preprocessing of the logs. Therefore, we have not implemented the Date Remapper.
To confirm the timestamp is mapped correctly, we have tested it in our sandbox, and the mapping has been verified to be correct.

audesikorav
audesikorav previously approved these changes Jan 20, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@iliakur iliakur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, some small fixes

keycloak/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
keycloak/pyproject.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
iliakur
iliakur previously approved these changes Jan 29, 2025
@iliakur iliakur merged commit f223704 into DataDog:master Feb 3, 2025
7 checks passed
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2025
* Add: keycloak Integration

* Update: manifest and changelog.d for CI checks

* Update: manifest.json

* Test pipeline log parsing for CI

* test different sample

* Test log without message field

* Revert pipeline sample testing log

* Update: grok parser and readme minor description

* Update: description in dashboard

* Update: replace sample with CI pipeline formatted sample

* Update: Format as per comment

* Update: Address review comments on 29/11/2024

* Update: test samples with only message attribute.

* Update: add results from pipeline

* Update: address review comments and update __init__.py and __about__.py

---------

Co-authored-by: Ilia Kurenkov <[email protected]> f223704
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants