Github user mattyb149 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/785#discussion_r76611496
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/ParseCEF.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+ * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
+ * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+ * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+ * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.nifi.processors.standard;
+
+import com.fluenda.parcefone.event.CEFHandlingException;
+import com.fluenda.parcefone.event.CommonEvent;
+import com.fluenda.parcefone.parser.CEFParser;
+
+
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.EventDriven;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.InputRequirement;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.InputRequirement.Requirement;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.SideEffectFree;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.SupportsBatching;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.WritesAttribute;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.WritesAttributes;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.CapabilityDescription;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.SeeAlso;
+import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.Tags;
+import org.apache.nifi.flowfile.FlowFile;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.AbstractProcessor;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.ProcessContext;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.ProcessSession;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.Relationship;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.exception.ProcessException;
+import org.apache.nifi.processor.io.InputStreamCallback;
+import org.apache.nifi.stream.io.StreamUtils;
+
+import java.io.IOException;
+import java.io.InputStream;
+import java.net.InetAddress;
+import java.text.SimpleDateFormat;
+import java.util.Date;
+import java.util.HashMap;
+import java.util.HashSet;
+import java.util.Map;
+import java.util.Set;
+
+@EventDriven
+@SideEffectFree
+@SupportsBatching
+@InputRequirement(Requirement.INPUT_REQUIRED)
+@Tags({"logs", "cef", "attributes", "system", "event", "message"})
+@CapabilityDescription("Parses the contents of a CEF formatted message and
adds attributes to the FlowFile for " +
+ "headers and extensions of the parts of the CEF message.\n" +
+ "Note: This Processor expects CEF messages WITHOUT the syslog
headers (i.e. starting at \"CEF:0\"")
+@WritesAttributes({@WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.version",
description = "The version of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.deviceVendor", description =
"The Device Vendor of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.deviceProduct", description =
"The deviceProduct of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.deviceVersion", description =
"The deviceVersion of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.deviceEventClassId",
description = "The deviceEventClassId of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.name", description = "The
name of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.header.severity", description = "The
severity of the CEF message."),
+ @WritesAttribute(attribute = "cef.extension.*", description = "The key
and value generated by the parsing of the message.")})
--- End diff --
How big are CEF messages? Is is prudent to put these as attributes (which
are in-memory and not copy-on-write like content IIRC)? Maybe a choice could be
offered for the target (as is done in other processors), such as
"flowfile-attribute" and "flowfile-content". If attributes were selected they
could be populated like they are now, if content was selected perhaps the
processor writes a flat JSON object. That way, if the message had a lot of
properties the user doesn't care about, they could choose to put everything in
content and use EvaluateJSONPath to get the properties they do care about.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
