-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Update filesystem permission to restrict access to datadog user #31770
Update filesystem permission to restrict access to datadog user #31770
Conversation
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: cefb01c Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +3.86 | [+0.84, +6.88] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.41 | [+0.28, +0.53] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.11 | [-0.35, +0.57] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.10 | [-0.67, +0.87] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.07 | [-0.80, +0.94] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.10, +0.11] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.75, +0.73] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.91, +0.85] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.83, +0.74] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.08 | [-0.71, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.08 | [-0.13, -0.03] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.12 | [-1.03, +0.78] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | -0.44 | [-1.12, +0.25] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.86 | [-0.93, -0.79] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -1.33 | [-2.04, -0.61] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -1.53 | [-1.65, -1.40] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
Explanation
Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%
Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:
- ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
- ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
- ➖ = no significant change in performance
A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".
For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
80d28fd
to
054893a
Compare
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=50626822 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit bec0bae |
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/log v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/log v0.59.1 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/log/setup v0.58.0-devel // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/pointer v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/scrubber v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/scrubber v0.59.1 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/system v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/system/socket v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/winutil v0.59.0 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/util/winutil v0.59.1 // indirect | ||
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/version v0.56.0 // indirect |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
❓ question: Why are all those dependencies bumped? Is this intentional?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added a winutil
dependency to the filesystem package and it updated all of these dependencies.
Co-authored-by: Branden Clark <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍🏻 LGTM for file owned by @DataDog/container-integrations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some feedback on spelling and capitalization.
releasenotes/notes/file-permissions-to-dduser-windows-6e9940175f9130ff.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…5f9130ff.yaml Co-authored-by: Rosa Trieu <[email protected]>
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
/merge |
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Updates file permissions to restrict to admin and datadog agent user on windows.
Motivation
https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/WINA-445
Better mirrors how linux handles setup of auth_token files to make sure they are readable by less privileges agent processes.
Describe how you validated your changes
Tested through added unit tests and existing e2e tests.
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes