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

fix(iast): improve overhead control logic (#8452) #8494

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 22, 2024
Merged

Conversation

gnufede
Copy link
Member

@gnufede gnufede commented Feb 22, 2024

IAST: Improve overhead control logic so the decision to analyze a request is done at span start and is saved at the span level using the core API. This should fix issues where requests were analyzed when they shouldn't be and viceversa.

  • Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description

  • Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR

  • Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability)

  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)

  • Library release note guidelines are followed or label changelog/no-changelog is set

  • Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, public corp docs)

  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

  • If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified @DataDog/apm-tees.

  • If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from @DataDog/security-design-and-guidance.

  • Title is accurate

  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal

  • Description motivates each change

  • Avoids breaking API changes

  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks

  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)

  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library

  • Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment

  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance
    policy

(cherry picked from commit 7e8aaac)

IAST: Improve overhead control logic so the decision to analyze a
request is done at span start and is saved at the span level using the
core API. This should fix issues where requests were analyzed when they
shouldn't be and viceversa.

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR
- [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability)
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/))
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))
- [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified
`@DataDog/apm-tees`.
- [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages,
or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from
`@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.

- [x] Title is accurate
- [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- [x] Description motivates each change
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications
of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

(cherry picked from commit 7e8aaac)
@gnufede gnufede requested review from a team as code owners February 22, 2024 14:21
@gnufede gnufede added the ASM Application Security Monitoring label Feb 22, 2024
@gnufede gnufede enabled auto-merge (squash) February 22, 2024 14:22
@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Datadog Report

Branch report: backport-8452-to-2.5
Commit report: f90965c
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 36436 Passed, 1397 Skipped, 1h 19m 22.07s Total duration (38m 27.09s time saved)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-02-22 15:46:52

Comparing candidate commit f90965c in PR branch backport-8452-to-2.5 with baseline commit 22fcb7f in branch 2.5.

Found 7 performance improvements and 15 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 173 metrics, 9 unstable metrics.

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_listeners_and_all_listeners

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-826.263KB; -702.774KB] or [-2.805%; -2.386%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_no_listeners

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-805.781KB; -652.805KB] or [-2.746%; -2.225%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-set_item

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+606.839KB; +763.683KB] or [+2.113%; +2.659%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-datadog_tracecontext_tracestate_not_propagated_on_trace_id_no_match

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+745.244KB; +916.094KB] or [+2.609%; +3.207%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-datadog_tracecontext_tracestate_propagated_on_trace_id_match

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+652.627KB; +837.498KB] or [+2.283%; +2.929%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-empty_headers

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-787.136KB; -594.854KB] or [-2.677%; -2.023%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-invalid_priority_header

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+610.627KB; +779.145KB] or [+2.130%; +2.718%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-invalid_trace_id_header

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-932.274KB; -732.340KB] or [-3.169%; -2.489%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-large_header_no_matches

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+830.197KB; +1027.339KB] or [+2.919%; +3.612%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-medium_header_no_matches

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+841.607KB; +987.257KB] or [+2.961%; +3.473%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-none_propagation_style

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+838.746KB; +1022.886KB] or [+2.952%; +3.600%]

scenario:httppropagationinject-ids_only

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-828.374KB; -684.688KB] or [-2.828%; -2.338%]

scenario:httppropagationinject-with_all

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+909.750KB; +1034.621KB] or [+3.203%; +3.642%]

scenario:httppropagationinject-with_tags

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-719.598KB; -589.074KB] or [-2.459%; -2.013%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-regular-case-explicit-query

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+718.360KB; +812.725KB] or [+2.462%; +2.786%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-regular-case-implicit-query

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+678.804KB; +779.372KB] or [+2.325%; +2.669%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-worst-case-explicit-query

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+723.989KB; +828.804KB] or [+2.477%; +2.836%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-useragentvariant_exists_1

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+645.301KB; +743.243KB] or [+2.224%; +2.561%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-useragentvariant_not_exists_2

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-745.240KB; -640.027KB] or [-2.506%; -2.152%]

scenario:tracer-large

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+1.095MB; +1.209MB] or [+3.755%; +4.144%]

scenario:tracer-medium

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+657.846KB; +750.769KB] or [+2.307%; +2.633%]

scenario:tracer-small

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+876.653KB; +988.665KB] or [+3.088%; +3.483%]

@gnufede gnufede merged commit 8dbdbf0 into 2.5 Feb 22, 2024
66 checks passed
@gnufede gnufede deleted the backport-8452-to-2.5 branch February 22, 2024 15:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ASM Application Security Monitoring
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants