Splunk Search

RegeEx help for Cisco logs

dewald13
Path Finder

I am trying to create an "action" field extraction to grab "permitted/denied" from my Cisco device logs. I can get this "(?i)-INGRESS (?P[^ ]+)" to match the majority of the fields but still not 100%. Any help is greatly appreciated!

EXAMPLE LOGS

Apr 4 13:37:55 XXX-gw 28127310: Apr 4 13:39:26.000:%FMANFP-6-IPACCESSLOGP: F0: fman_fp_image: list GLOBAL-INGRESS denied tcp XXX.XX.9.XXX(53165) -> 132.X.X.X(25), 1 packet

Apr 4 13:37:55 XXX-usr-250.grace.ad.XX.XXX 192461: Apr 4 13:39:26:%SEC-6-IPACCESSLOGS: list 15 permitted XX.16.XX.X 1 packet

Apr 4 13:37:55 XXX-sdp 23211: Apr 4 13:39:25.975:%SEC-6-IPACCESSLOGNP: list NTPPEER denied 0 XXX.XX.2.X -> XXX.XXX.X.XX,1 packet

0 Karma
1 Solution

dewald13
Path Finder

The following regex eneded up working perfectly

(?i) list[ ].+?

View solution in original post

0 Karma

dewald13
Path Finder

The following regex eneded up working perfectly

(?i) list[ ].+?

0 Karma

tgow
Splunk Employee
Splunk Employee

This is tricky but does have some consistency. The string ": list (some word) is consistent so I would try this for the regex:

(?i):\s+list\s+\S+\s+(?<fieldname>[^ ]+)\s+

Hope that helps.

0 Karma
Got questions? Get answers!

Join the Splunk Community Slack to learn, troubleshoot, and make connections with fellow Splunk practitioners in real time!

Meet up IRL or virtually!

Join Splunk User Groups to connect and learn in-person by region or remotely by topic or industry.

Get Updates on the Splunk Community!

Splunk App Dev Quarterly Roundup: AI, Agents, and Innovation!

Another quarter, another wave of innovation. From complex integrations to pushing the limits ...

Federated Search for Dynamic Data Self Storage Is Now Generally Available on Splunk ...

 Splunk is excited to announce the General Availability of Federated Search for Dynamic Data Self Storage ...

Index This | What has many keys but can’t unlock a door?

July 2026 Edition  Hayyy Splunk Education Enthusiasts and the Eternally Curious!   We’re back with this ...