The above looks great - nice work!. Since you're using a match statement, you're essentially saying 'group me events based on the variable 'test' (which stores the value in principal.user.userid) over a 1 hour period. Within the outcome section, you will need to aggregate any output.
For example, lets say you have 2 events that occur in the match period (1 hour), *NOTE THAT THE RUN FREQUENCY WILL ALSO BE A FACTOR IN EVENT AGGREGATION*, and you have two different user_agents (within network.http.user_agent), the use of the function 'array_distinct', will imply that you want it to output unique user agents over the aggregated (group) events.
The issue arises because theoutcomesection is trying to access the field$create.target.resource.namewithout proper aggregation when amatchsection is present.
Here's a breakdown of why:
Single-Event vs. Multi-Event Context:When amatchsection is used, the rule transitions from a single-event to a multi-event context. This fundamentally changes how variables are interpreted. In a single-event context,$createwould represent a single event. However, with amatchsection,$createnow represents a group of events within the specified time window.
Repeated Field Unnesting:The field$create.target.resource.nameis not inherently a repeated field. However, in a multi-event context, it becomes effectively repeated because$createrepresents multiple events, potentially each with a differenttarget.resource.name. This is due to a process called "repeated field unnesting," where Chronicle expands repeated fields to create individual rows for each element within those repeated fields.
Outcome Aggregation Requirement:In theoutcomesection, each variable assignment must result in a single value. However, with thematchsection and repeated field unnesting,$create.target.resource.namecould represent multiple distinct values. Therefore, it must be aggregated to produce a single output for the$bucket_nameoutcome.
The Solution:
To fix this issue, you need to apply an aggregation function to$create.target.resource.namewithin theoutcomesection. Here are a few options:
array_distinct:This will collect all unique bucket names within the matching events:
By applying aggregation in theoutcomesection, you address the ambiguity caused by repeated field unnesting and ensure each outcome variable has a single, defined value.
The issue arises because theoutcomesection is trying to access the field$create.target.resource.namewithout proper aggregation when amatchsection is present.
Here's a breakdown of why:
Single-Event vs. Multi-Event Context:When amatchsection is used, the rule transitions from a single-event to a multi-event context. This fundamentally changes how variables are interpreted. In a single-event context,$createwould represent a single event. However, with amatchsection,$createnow represents a group of events within the specified time window.
Repeated Field Unnesting:The field$create.target.resource.nameis not inherently a repeated field. However, in a multi-event context, it becomes effectively repeated because$createrepresents multiple events, potentially each with a differenttarget.resource.name. This is due to a process called "repeated field unnesting," where Chronicle expands repeated fields to create individual rows for each element within those repeated fields.
Outcome Aggregation Requirement:In theoutcomesection, each variable assignment must result in a single value. However, with thematchsection and repeated field unnesting,$create.target.resource.namecould represent multiple distinct values. Therefore, it must be aggregated to produce a single output for the$bucket_nameoutcome.
The Solution:
To fix this issue, you need to apply an aggregation function to$create.target.resource.namewithin theoutcomesection. Here are a few options:
array_distinct:This will collect all unique bucket names within the matching events:
By applying aggregation in theoutcomesection, you address the ambiguity caused by repeated field unnesting and ensure each outcome variable has a single, defined value.
Thank you for the detailed response!
However, I'm still facing the error with the new rule -
validating intermediate representation: event values in a match window must be aggregated
The above looks great - nice work!. Since you're using a match statement, you're essentially saying 'group me events based on the variable 'test' (which stores the value in principal.user.userid) over a 1 hour period. Within the outcome section, you will need to aggregate any output.
For example, lets say you have 2 events that occur in the match period (1 hour), *NOTE THAT THE RUN FREQUENCY WILL ALSO BE A FACTOR IN EVENT AGGREGATION*, and you have two different user_agents (within network.http.user_agent), the use of the function 'array_distinct', will imply that you want it to output unique user agents over the aggregated (group) events.
Sorry. My previous response missed the aspect of theoutcomesection when amatchsection is used:all event fields used in theoutcomesection, even non-repeated ones, must be aggregated when amatchsection is present.This is because the introduction of amatchsection changes the context from single-event to multi-event, causing all event fields to become effectively repeated.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
Multi-Event Context:
When amatchsection is used, the rule engine groups events based on the specifiedmatchvariable and time window. Within each group (or "match window"), there can be multiple events.
Due to this grouping, any reference to an event variable in theoutcomesection now represents a set of values—one value from each event within the group.
Even fields that are not explicitly marked as "repeated" in the UDM schema become effectively repeated in a multi-event context. For example,$create.target.cloud.project.namemight seem like a single value, but because$createnow represents a group of events, it's possible for different events within that group to have different project names.
Repeated Field Unnesting:
As the previous response mentioned, Chronicle's rule engine performs "repeated field unnesting." In a multi-event context, this unnesting is applied to all event fields, not just those explicitly marked as repeated.
This unnesting process essentially expands the events within the match window, creating separate rows for each possible combination of values from all the fields. This leads to every field being treated as if it were a repeated field.
Why my original example didn't work:
The original fix only addressed the$create.target.resource.namefield, which was explicitly recognized as potentially having multiple values due to its nature as a potentially dynamic field within a bucket creation event.
However, I missed the fact thatallevent fields referenced in theoutcomesection needed aggregation because of the multi-event context and the unnesting process.
Why Your Rule Works:
You correctly applied thearray_distinctfunction to all event fields used in theoutcomesection:$bucket_name,$gcp_project_name,$bucket_location,$requesting_user, and$user_agent.
By aggregating each field, you ensure that theoutcomesection only assigns a single value to each output variable, even if the underlying event data contains multiple values within the 1-hour match window.
This satisfies the rule engine's requirement that "event values in a match window must be aggregated" and allows the rule to function correctly.
When amatchsection is present in a YaraL-2 rule, remember thatallevent fields used in theoutcomesection, even non-repeated fields, must be aggregated. This is due to the multi-event context and repeated field unnesting, which effectively treat all fields as repeated within a match window. Your updated rule correctly addresses this by applying aggregation to all relevant fields. Sorry for the miss!