Yes, I think so too. Chaim has done steps of 10 for a reason. And that way, it is immediately visible that i.e. 920272 is closely related to 920270.
Ahoj, Christian On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 02:47:56PM +0100, Walter Hop wrote: > 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 -- mailto:christian.fol...@netnea.com http://www.christian-folini.ch twitter: @ChrFolini _______________________________________________ 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
