@bmeeks said in Suricata inline whitelisting:
Suppress rules can be used to make sure no alerts are generated for a host. This is not efficient however, as the suppression is only considered post-matching. In other words, Suricata first inspects a rule, and only then will it consider per-host suppressions.
This means to me that the pass, drop, reject, etc., decision is made first and then the suppress list is checked to see whether or not to suppress the alert in the logs. I need to dive into the source code for the Suricata binary and see if I can precisely determine how suppression affects dropping.
I need to dig into this some more before I can post a definitive answer.
Hi, did this get figured out/resolved? We may have run into this today on Suricata package v4.0.4_1...I suppressed an alert but the behavior didn't seem to change until I disabled the rule.
(FWIW it was rule 1:2013744 "ET INFO DYNAMIC_DNS HTTP Request to a no-ip Domain" which would make sense for dynamic domains but was for cdn.no-ip.com which is their actual domain. The rule only excludes www.no-ip.com.)