<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Tuning security in enterprise in Security</title>
    <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100613#M3264</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;assuming this isn't possible?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:06:34 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>brettcave</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-10-25T08:06:34Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Tuning security in enterprise</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100612#M3263</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am trying to configure explicit information access based on roles in Splunk Enterprise.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I have configured a number of event types and field extractions. Is it possible to configure access to an event type, but not allow access to 1 field in a multi-field matcher? e.g. below to illustrate what I am trying to achieve:&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;event type "SomeInfo" search term: "SomeInfo: "
field extractor "InfoExtr" regex:   aField: (?P&amp;lt;FieldA&amp;gt;[^,]+), bField: (?P&amp;lt;FieldB&amp;gt;[^,]+), cField: (?P&amp;lt;FieldC&amp;gt;[^,]+)
log example: SomeInfo: aField: foo, bField: bar, cField: 99
&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I would like to allow a role to access FieldA and FieldB, but not FieldC. Is this possible?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I have the following in the Restrict search Terms: &lt;CODE&gt;(eventtype="SomeInfo" OR eventtype="Other")&lt;/CODE&gt;. I have tried adding &lt;CODE&gt;(NOT FieldC)&lt;/CODE&gt; (doesn't filter) or &lt;CODE&gt;(NOT FieldC="*")&lt;/CODE&gt; (filters entire event).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:57:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100612#M3263</guid>
      <dc:creator>brettcave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-10-24T07:57:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Tuning security in enterprise</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100613#M3264</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;assuming this isn't possible?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:06:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100613#M3264</guid>
      <dc:creator>brettcave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-10-25T08:06:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Tuning security in enterprise</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100614#M3265</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;doesn't look like it.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:54:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100614#M3265</guid>
      <dc:creator>brettcave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-23T12:54:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Tuning security in enterprise</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100615#M3266</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would suggest indexing the same data to two indexes. Anonymize (&lt;A href="http://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/Data/Anonymizedatausingconfigurationfiles"&gt;http://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/Data/Anonymizedatausingconfigurationfiles&lt;/A&gt;) the data going into one index and give one user/group access to that index. Let the data go into the second index as is and give access to that index to the other user/group.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:56:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100615#M3266</guid>
      <dc:creator>rtadams89</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-23T15:56:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Tuning security in enterprise</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100616#M3267</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;thanks, that makes sense, nice approach.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:19:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Security/Tuning-security-in-enterprise/m-p/100616#M3267</guid>
      <dc:creator>brettcave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-01-24T11:19:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

