Skip to content

[ExtraHop][Qualys GAV] - Fix Cannot execute ILM policy delete step #132387

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ShourieG
Copy link
Contributor

@ShourieG ShourieG commented Aug 4, 2025

This PR focuses on the short term solution which add the logs-extrahop.investigation-* and logs-qualys_gav.asset-* indices under the kibana_system role with deletion privileges to prevent a failed deletion error when the index enters the deletion phase for the ILM lifecycle, in upcoming PRs.

Current behavior:

  • It shows permission issue while deleting the index

For Qualys GAV:

{
  "failed_step": "delete",
  "step_info": {
    "type": "security_exception",
    "reason": "action [indices:admin/delete] is unauthorized for user [found-internal-kibana4-server] with effective roles [found-internal-kibana4-server,kibana_system] on indices [.ds-logs-qualys_gav.asset-default-2025.07.24-000001], this action is granted by the index privileges [delete_index,manage,all]"
  }
}

For ExtraHop:

{
  "failed_step": "delete",
  "step_info": {
    "type": "security_exception",
    "reason": "action [indices:admin/delete] is unauthorized for user [found-internal-kibana4-server] with effective roles [found-internal-kibana4-server, kibana_system] on indices [.ds-logs-extrahop.investigation-default-2025.07.23-000001], this action is granted by the index privileges [delete_index, manage, all]"
  }
}

Closes - #131825
Similar Issues : elastic/kibana#197390, #116982

@ShourieG ShourieG self-assigned this Aug 4, 2025
@ShourieG ShourieG added the >bug label Aug 4, 2025
@ShourieG ShourieG requested a review from a team as a code owner August 4, 2025 09:59
@ShourieG ShourieG added the Team:Cloud Security Meta label for Cloud Security team label Aug 4, 2025
@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added v9.2.0 external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team labels Aug 4, 2025
@ShourieG ShourieG added v8.18.0 :Security/Authorization Roles, Privileges, DLS/FLS, RBAC/ABAC and removed external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team v9.2.0 labels Aug 4, 2025
@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-security (Team:Security)

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added the Team:Security Meta label for security team label Aug 4, 2025
Comment on lines +518 to +520
"logs-carbon_black_cloud.asset_vulnerability_summary-*",
"logs-extrahop.investigation-*",
"logs-qualys_gav.asset-*"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ShourieG, can create a new list as this list for 3rd party integrations required for CDR workflow.

Say: 245d69d and with comments to your usecase.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks, this makes sense

@gmarouli gmarouli added v9.2.0 and removed v8.18.0 labels Aug 5, 2025
@gmarouli
Copy link
Contributor

gmarouli commented Aug 5, 2025

Hi @ShourieG , I do not think that I am qualified to review this, it looks like github has already selected the a team to review.

My only comment is the wrong version. I removed the 8.18.0 and put back the 9.2.0. Changes in this branch only make it to 9.2.0, if you need it backported to other versions let me know and I can add the necessary the labels.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
>bug :Security/Authorization Roles, Privileges, DLS/FLS, RBAC/ABAC Team:Cloud Security Meta label for Cloud Security team Team:Security Meta label for security team v9.2.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants