<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Consolidating or aggregating IP addresses in Processor in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/395756#M95218</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Apologies if this question has been asked before, I searched the board but couldn't see anything that stood out&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'm consuming the SANS/IRC list of IP addresses attributed to Internet Security Researchers, in an attempt to cut-down on false-positive threat alerts in customer networks. The Miner I wrote works fine, and pulls down about ~6700 IP addresses.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;When passed into a Processor (Cloned from 'stdlib.aggregatorIPv4Generic', and of the same class '&lt;SPAN&gt;minemeld.ft.ipop.AggregateIPv4FT') all addresses are getting sent to an output. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;The problem is that because the list is gathered automatically, it has one IP per-line. Example;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.0-102.165.30.0&lt;BR /&gt;102.165.30.1-102.165.30.1&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.2-102.165.30.2&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.3-102.165.30.3&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.255-102.165.30.255&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I feel that added ~6700 entries into an EDL will be unneccessarily taxing on the firewall. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Since I'm putting in a top-level firewall rule to 'drop' packets coming from these IPs, the firewall will have to match the incoming packets IP to all ~6700 possibilities - whereas if I could consolidate the IPs (for example the above consolidates into 102.165.30.0/24) then the number of matches greatly decreases&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I realise that 'aggregator' in the Processors name refers to the ability to 'aggregate' from multiple miners into one processor. But is there an ability to aggregate (/consolidate) IP addresses inside a Processor?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If this can't be done in Minemeld, then I may have to write a Python parser to pull down the list and consolidate manually - but at that point Minemeld becomes irrelevant, as if I'm hosting the output of the Python script somewhere I can just point the firewall to that instead&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2021 08:58:50 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>sam_miller</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-04-05T08:58:50Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Consolidating or aggregating IP addresses in Processor</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/395756#M95218</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Apologies if this question has been asked before, I searched the board but couldn't see anything that stood out&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'm consuming the SANS/IRC list of IP addresses attributed to Internet Security Researchers, in an attempt to cut-down on false-positive threat alerts in customer networks. The Miner I wrote works fine, and pulls down about ~6700 IP addresses.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;When passed into a Processor (Cloned from 'stdlib.aggregatorIPv4Generic', and of the same class '&lt;SPAN&gt;minemeld.ft.ipop.AggregateIPv4FT') all addresses are getting sent to an output. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;The problem is that because the list is gathered automatically, it has one IP per-line. Example;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.0-102.165.30.0&lt;BR /&gt;102.165.30.1-102.165.30.1&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.2-102.165.30.2&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.3-102.165.30.3&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;...&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;102.165.30.255-102.165.30.255&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I feel that added ~6700 entries into an EDL will be unneccessarily taxing on the firewall. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Since I'm putting in a top-level firewall rule to 'drop' packets coming from these IPs, the firewall will have to match the incoming packets IP to all ~6700 possibilities - whereas if I could consolidate the IPs (for example the above consolidates into 102.165.30.0/24) then the number of matches greatly decreases&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I realise that 'aggregator' in the Processors name refers to the ability to 'aggregate' from multiple miners into one processor. But is there an ability to aggregate (/consolidate) IP addresses inside a Processor?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If this can't be done in Minemeld, then I may have to write a Python parser to pull down the list and consolidate manually - but at that point Minemeld becomes irrelevant, as if I'm hosting the output of the Python script somewhere I can just point the firewall to that instead&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2021 08:58:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/395756#M95218</guid>
      <dc:creator>sam_miller</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-04-05T08:58:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Consolidating or aggregating IP addresses in Processor</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/410124#M95219</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you checked out this form Lmori, in &lt;A href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/minemeld-discussions/miner-to-collect-aws-ip/td-p/75925" target="_blank"&gt;https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/minemeld-discussions/miner-to-collect-aws-ip/td-p/75925&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIV id="bodyDisplay_7" class="lia-message-body lia-component-message-view-widget-body lia-component-body-signature-highlight-escalation lia-component-message-view-widget-body-signature-highlight-escalation"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="lia-message-body-content"&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yes, add&amp;nbsp;use the following format for the URL feed:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;https://&amp;lt;minemeld&amp;gt;/feeds/&amp;lt;aws feed&amp;gt;?tr=1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;See here for additional details:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/MineMeld-Articles/Parameters-for-the-output-feeds/ta-p/146170" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/MineMeld-Articles/Parameters-for-the-output-feeds/ta-p/146170&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 09:13:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/410124#M95219</guid>
      <dc:creator>Dereje</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-05-31T09:13:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Consolidating or aggregating IP addresses in Processor</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/410185#M95220</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Dereje&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the link, that's useful info&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately ?tr=1 won't consolidate subnets, it justr translates each line&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;102.165.30.0-102.165.30.0
102.165.30.1-102.165.30.1
102.165.30.10-102.165.30.10&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Becomes&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;102.165.30.0
102.165.30.1
102.165.30.10&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Appreciate the reply though&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 16:22:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/consolidating-or-aggregating-ip-addresses-in-processor/m-p/410185#M95220</guid>
      <dc:creator>sam_miller</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-05-31T16:22:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

