What if I want to exclude my own company:

HOSTEXCLUDE *.wadsack-allen.com

Then the DNS lookup needs to be done first.

Now my opinion is that Analog should apply numeric excluded before DNS
lookups and non-numeric ones after, which would take care of this
confusion. (But I haven't submitted a patch yet... :-) )

-- 

Jeremy Wadsack
Wadsack-Allen Digital Group


Keith Fetterman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> Jeremy,

> You hit it dead on.  That specific IP address was mapped to a host name 
> in the /etc/hosts file on the server.  I commented out the entry in the 
> hosts file and I found the entry in analog's dnscache file and removed 
> it. When I re-ran the report, the entry disappeared.

> So it looks like analog first translates IP addresses to host names (if 
> it can) before it filters the log file with HOSTEXCLUDE.  Thus, 
> HOSTEXLUDE didn't work for this IP address since it was already mapped 
> to a host name.

> Is this a possible bug in analog? Shouldn't HOSTEXCLUDE work on IP 
> addresses even though the IP address can be translated to a host name?

> Thanks a lot for your help,
> Keith

> Jeremy Wadsack wrote:

>> Keith Fetterman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>> 
>> 
>>>I ran into an interesting problem with analog.  I have the following 
>>>parameter in my analog.cfg file to block all requests from internal 
>>>computers:
>>>
>> 
>>>HOSTEXCLUDE 10.0.*
>>>
>> 
>>>Shouldn't this statement reject all requests from computers coming from 
>>>the subnet 10.0.0.0 - 10.0.0.255?
>>>
>> 
>>>In general it is working, but I noticed that one and only one computer 
>>>from this subnet is being included in my User report. The computer has 
>>>the IP address of 10.0.0.4.
>>>
>> 
>>>My User report is based on a cookie that is written as the last field in 
>>>the access_log.  To identify the user, the following parameter is 
>>>defined in analog.cfg:
>>>
>> 
>>>USERALIAS REGEXPI:g2m_user=(.*?); $1
>>>
>> 
>>>I recoginized one of the users in the User report to be from a computer 
>>>located at IP address 10.0.0.4.
>>>
>> 
>>>Why isn't this filtered by the HOSTEXCLUDE?  Other computers on the same 
>>>subnet are being filtered out.
>>>
>> 
>>>Any ideas?
>>>
>> 
>> Try running a report with no HOSTEXCLUDE but a USEREXCLUDE that
>> excludes this user. I bet you'll find that the user is appearing the
>> the logs from a different IP number (or from a resolved address that
>> is not excluded).
>> 
>> 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
|  mailing list, go to
|    http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/unsubscribe.html
|
|  List archives are available at
|    http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
|    http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/archives/
|    http://www.tallylist.com/archives/index.cfm/mlist.7
+------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to