Splunk Search

Regex help

vlape_SCWX
New Member

I am at a loss as to why the following is not working.
log:
2020-03-31 20:31:19,621 fail2ban.actions [709]: NOTICE [sshd] Unban 156.38.x.x
Query
index=main fail2ban.actions | regex _raw="[(?sshd)]" | fields jail
I have double checked the regular expression with regex101 and "sshd" is captured in group jail.
Am i missing something?
Splunk Enterprise 8.0.2.1

Tags (2)
0 Karma
1 Solution

to4kawa
Ultra Champion
 index=main fail2ban.actions sshd
| rex "\[(?<jail>[a-z]+)\]"
| fields jail

regex: https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/SearchReference/Regex
rex: https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/SearchReference/Rex

what do you want to do?
[is meta character.
your | regex _raw="[(?<jail>sshd)]" searches the word sshd

see following:

  \       general escape character with several uses
  ^      assert start of string (or line, in multiline mode)
  $      assert end of string (or line, in multiline mode)
  .      match any character except newline (by default)
  [      start character class definition
  |      start of alternative branch
  (      start subpattern
  )      end subpattern
  ?      extends the meaning of (
         also 0 or 1 quantifier
         also quantifier minimizer
  *      0 or more quantifier
  +      1 or more quantifier
         also "possessive quantifier"
  {      start min/max quantifier

https://www.pcre.org/original/doc/html/pcrepattern.html

View solution in original post

0 Karma

to4kawa
Ultra Champion
 index=main fail2ban.actions sshd
| rex "\[(?<jail>[a-z]+)\]"
| fields jail

regex: https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/SearchReference/Regex
rex: https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/SearchReference/Rex

what do you want to do?
[is meta character.
your | regex _raw="[(?<jail>sshd)]" searches the word sshd

see following:

  \       general escape character with several uses
  ^      assert start of string (or line, in multiline mode)
  $      assert end of string (or line, in multiline mode)
  .      match any character except newline (by default)
  [      start character class definition
  |      start of alternative branch
  (      start subpattern
  )      end subpattern
  ?      extends the meaning of (
         also 0 or 1 quantifier
         also quantifier minimizer
  *      0 or more quantifier
  +      1 or more quantifier
         also "possessive quantifier"
  {      start min/max quantifier

https://www.pcre.org/original/doc/html/pcrepattern.html

0 Karma

vlape_SCWX
New Member

That worked! thanks you. Why is it when I search for the exact match it returns nothing?

0 Karma

to4kawa
Ultra Champion

regex is search, not field extract command.
so, field jail is missing.

0 Karma

niketn
Legend

@vlape_SCWX can you try something like the following:

index=main fail2ban.actions 
| rex "\[(?<jail>sshd)\]" 
| table jail _raw

Not sure what you want to pull with hard-coded sshd

____________________________________________
| makeresults | eval message= "Happy Splunking!!!"
0 Karma

vlape_SCWX
New Member

For some reason the \ before [ was stripped when posting the question.

0 Karma

vnravikumar
Champion

Hi

Use Code Sample or press Ctrl +k while posting your query

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 ...