Sounds great!

> On 06 Mar 2016, at 09:57, Franziska Buehler 
> <franziska.buehler.schmoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We already have some stricter siblings for existing rules.
> But we don’t have a numbering scheme for these new rules yet.
> My suggestion would be as follows:
> 
> The RuleIDs in CRS 3.0.0 count up in steps of 10. An obvious
> possibility is to use the last digit.
> Subsequent stricter clones of a main rule will be assigned the id of
> the main rule plus the last digit incremented.
> 
> For example, we produce a stricter sibling of the rule 920270. The new
> stricter clone gets the id 920271. If we produce an even stricter
> sibling, this rule will get the rule id 920272 and so on.
> 
> We will not produce more than 5 different clones, because we defined
> the paranoia levels from 0 to 4. So we have enough space.
> 
> What are your thougts about this proposal?
> 
> Regards,
> Franziska
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set mailing list
> Owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set@lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set

_______________________________________________
Owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set mailing list
Owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set@lists.owasp.org
https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-modsecurity-core-rule-set

Reply via email to