Skip to content

[CWS-6786] Insertion of connect events in the activity tree - #56529

Open
mftoure wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
momar/insert-connect-events-in-activity-tree
Open

mftoure wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
momar/insert-connect-events-in-activity-tree

Conversation

@mftoure

@mftoure mftoure commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Adds support for inserting connect events into the V2 security profile activity trees, which was previously missing. This enables tracking outbound connection activity alongside existing bind, DNS, and other event types.

Changes

  • Added ConnectNode struct (analogous to BindNode) to SocketNode with full lifecycle support: insertion, eviction, tagging, sizing, and graph rendering
  • Added InsertConnectEvent to ProcessNode with IPv4/IPv6 address family validation
  • Added protobuf encoding/decoding for ConnectNode using the new proto message from agent-payload
  • Added "connect" to the default V2 security profile event types
  • Bumped max_dump_size from 2560 to 3072 to accommodate the additional connect node data
  • Added connect_only test case in size_test.go

TODO

  • Merge and release the corresponding agent-payload PR first, then update go.mod to point to the released version before merging this PR

@mftoure mftoure added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests labels Sep 17, 2026
@mftoure
mftoure marked this pull request as ready for review September 17, 2026 14:55
@mftoure
mftoure requested review from a team as code owners September 17, 2026 14:55
@mftoure
mftoure requested a review from dustmop September 17, 2026 14:55
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the long review PR is complex, plan time to review it label Sep 17, 2026

@github-actions github-actions Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

AI review by Codex (OpenAI) - workflow run

The patch is incorrect: it drops normal nonblocking connect events, leaving outbound activity missing from security profiles.

Comment on lines +568 to +569
if evt.Connect.SyscallEvent.Retval != 0 {
return false, nil

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[P1] Preserve nonblocking connect events returning EINPROGRESS

Nonblocking TCP connections commonly return -EINPROGRESS while the connection proceeds successfully. The connect eBPF hook explicitly emits these events (and permits -EAGAIN for affected kernels), but this check discards them. Consequently, applications using nonblocking sockets—including typical Go network clients—will have their outbound connections omitted from activity trees. Accept the supported asynchronous return values and add insertion coverage for them.

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2

datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2 Bot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 1.46%
Overall Coverage: 51.59% (-5.01%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: eac4904 | Docs | Give us feedback!

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 4493a6e
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Job ID: d8582a32-2a58-42fe-94cf-7c5b1c2249a4

Baseline: 4493a6e
Comparison: eac4904
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +0.63 [-0.22, +1.48] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory utilization +0.34 [+0.27, +0.41] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory utilization +0.33 [+0.20, +0.45] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory utilization +0.17 [+0.13, +0.20] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory utilization +0.16 [+0.12, +0.20] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
dsd_uds_10mb_3k_timestamped_contexts_memory memory utilization +0.14 [-0.06, +0.35] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.13 [+0.09, +0.16] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.12 [-0.11, +0.34] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.05 [+0.00, +0.09] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
dsd_uds_10mb_3k_timestamped_contexts_cpu % cpu utilization -1.53 [-1.76, -1.29] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 5 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 175.95MiB ≤ 179MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 749.32KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 5 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 523.38MiB ≤ 537MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features total_bytes_received 10/10 1.14MiB ≤ 1.25MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 18 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 216.23MiB ≤ 228MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 263.48MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 368.82 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 19 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 403.42MiB ≤ 455MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 0.94GiB ≤ 1.04GiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory_usage 10/10 73.12MiB ≤ 75MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle cpu_usage 10/10 30.64 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory_usage 10/10 319.59MiB ≤ 355MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 64.95 ≤ 200 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 302.25MiB ≤ 335MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 23.86 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 313.58MiB ≤ 345MiB bounds checks dashboard

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:

  1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

  2. 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.

  3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_private_action_runner, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed component/system-probe internal Identify a non-fork PR long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/agent-security team/ebpf-platform team/fleet-automation

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants