Skip to content
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

[SIEM] Detection engine: Create new rule should not validate input when going back #54897

Closed
cwurm opened this issue Jan 15, 2020 · 8 comments
Closed
Labels
bug Fixes for quality problems that affect the customer experience Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. Team:SIEM

Comments

@cwurm
Copy link
Contributor

cwurm commented Jan 15, 2020

To reproduce:

  1. Create new rule, complete Define rule, click Continue
  2. Now on About rule, try click Edit on Define rule
  3. Can't go back because About rule is not yet filled out

Expected:

  1. It should always be possible to go back in the rule editing dialogue

Screenshot:

Screen Shot 2020-01-15 at 11 37 49

@cwurm cwurm added bug Fixes for quality problems that affect the customer experience Team:SIEM labels Jan 15, 2020
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/siem (Team:SIEM)

@cwurm
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwurm commented Jan 15, 2020

And when filling Name/Description, then going back to edit Define rule, then continuing again, Name/Description are now gone.

@XavierM
Copy link
Contributor

XavierM commented Jan 15, 2020

And when filling Name/Description, then going back to edit Define rule, then continuing again, Name/Description are now gone.

I will add a dialog error to tell the user that they need to click on continue before going away from it

@XavierM
Copy link
Contributor

XavierM commented Jan 15, 2020

But for the general of this issue, you should talk to @MichaelMarcialis.

@MichaelMarcialis
Copy link
Contributor

Expected:

  1. It should always be possible to go back in the rule editing dialogue

@cwurm: Thanks for the feedback. This is a valid point. The original reason for not allowing the user to leave a panel in any direction without having validation pass (both continuing forward or going back to edit) is because of a situation such as the following:

  1. User completes step one and clicks continue. Step one validates, collapses and step two opens.
  2. User completes step two and clicks continue. Step two validates, collapses and step three opens.
  3. User clicks edit button on step one to go back and make changes. The changes entered are invalid, but the user doesn't notice or correct.
  4. User clicks edit button on step two to go forward and make changes. Now the validation errors in step one are hidden from the user's view.

The requirement of validation before leaving a step in any direction was a quick fix suggested by me in order to prevent having to over complicate the UI with additional validation errors for when a step was collapsed. However, I see your point that the ability to always go backwards to edit quickly is an important one.

What if we just simply always treated any step past the user's current location as if it had never been validated and completed? This way, edit buttons wouldn't appear for any step forward from the user's current location. This way, the user is always required to click the continue buttons (which would trigger that step's validation) to proceed forward and can optionally click the edit button (which would no longer demand validation) to go back. Thoughts?

That said, I don't believe we have time to make any such changes before the 7.6 release. Perhaps we can consider this as an enhancement for the next release?

@cwurm
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwurm commented Jan 20, 2020

What if we just simply always treated any step past the user's current location as if it had never been validated and completed? This way, edit buttons wouldn't appear for any step forward from the user's current location. This way, the user is always required to click the continue buttons (which would trigger that step's validation) to proceed forward and can optionally click the edit button (which would no longer demand validation) to go back. Thoughts?

Yes, I think this would work.

@spong
Copy link
Member

spong commented Jun 25, 2020

@MadameSheema the behavior above is still present in 7.9.0-snapshot.

@MadameSheema
Copy link
Member

Closing this ticket since it is duplicated.

@MindyRS MindyRS added the Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. label Oct 27, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Fixes for quality problems that affect the customer experience Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. Team:SIEM
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants