docs: clarify EQL v3 configuration and Bloom defaults - #445
Conversation
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe documentation now targets Proxy 3.x and EQL v3. It adds compatibility notices, pins the Docker Compose image, updates encryption configuration guidance, documents Bloom-filter matching, and replaces EQL v2 searchable JSON options with fixed EQL v3 behavior. ChangesEQL v3 documentation
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/how-to/index.md`:
- Around line 5-11: Update the installation example in the guide to use an
explicitly supported Proxy 3.x image tag instead of the floating
cipherstash/proxy:latest reference, or clearly document a tag policy that
guarantees a 3.x image. Keep the surrounding Proxy 3.x and EQL v3 scope
unchanged.
🪄 Autofix
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: ad860316-a26a-4b01-8e7d-d23e31178ae3
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
docs/how-to/index.mddocs/reference/index.mddocs/reference/searchable-json.md
The guide is scoped to Proxy 3.x, but `latest` will drift to the next major version whose configuration this guide does not describe. Addresses review feedback on #445.
e50f9da to
f59772c
Compare
auxesis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this @freshtonic!
I have added a suggested change with a commit message you can use.
Co-authored-by: Lindsay Holmwood <lindsay@cipherstash.com> Signed-off-by: James Sadler <james@cipherstash.com>
|
Note GitHub couldn't provide a complete incremental comparison for this pull request, so CodeRabbit is performing a full review instead. This review may take a little longer. |
Summary
Validation
Linear: CIP-3714
Summary by CodeRabbit