Skip to content

Conversation

@ferullo
Copy link
Contributor

@ferullo ferullo commented Aug 1, 2025

Summary

This aligns the tool-tips shown in Kibana to the same Docs-Team-approved-text on https://www.elastic.co/docs/reference/security/defend-advanced-settings (including a few pending updates in elastic/docs-content#2365). One new advanced option is added. It's been missing from Kibana -- it isn't new.

Checklist

Check the PR satisfies following conditions.

Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.

Identify risks

No risk assuming this renders right in Kibana. It's just tool-tip wording changes.

@ferullo ferullo added release_note:skip Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment labels Aug 1, 2025
),
license: 'platinum',
},
{
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the new option that was added.

@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor

Cloud deployment initiated, see credentials at: https://buildkite.com/elastic/kibana-deploy-cloud-from-pr/builds/415

@ferullo ferullo marked this pull request as ready for review September 15, 2025 18:26
@ferullo ferullo requested a review from a team as a code owner September 15, 2025 18:26
@ferullo ferullo requested review from dasansol92 and removed request for szwarckonrad September 15, 2025 18:26
@ferullo ferullo added backport:skip This PR does not require backporting ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment and removed ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment labels Sep 16, 2025
Copy link
Member

@ashokaditya ashokaditya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the changes. I've a few suggestions that apply to all the text changes. I think overall, the messages can be improved/simplified so it is easier to understand. I would suggest that we get someone from the docs team to proof read the copy changes here.

@@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ export const AdvancedPolicySchema: AdvancedPolicySchemaType[] = [
'xpack.securitySolution.endpoint.policy.advanced.linux.advanced.logging.file',
{
defaultMessage:
'A supplied value will override the log level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. It is recommended Fleet be used to change this logging in most circumstances. Allowed values are error, warning, info, debug, and trace.',
"Override the log level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. Elastic recommends using Fleet to change this logging setting in most circumstances. Allowed values are 'error', 'warning', 'info', 'debug', and 'trace'. Default: Fleet configuration is used.",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think logging level since we have logging setting later in the sentence?

Suggested change
"Override the log level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. Elastic recommends using Fleet to change this logging setting in most circumstances. Allowed values are 'error', 'warning', 'info', 'debug', and 'trace'. Default: Fleet configuration is used.",
"Override the logging level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. Elastic recommends using Fleet to change this logging setting in most circumstances. Allowed values are 'error', 'warning', 'info', 'debug', and 'trace'. Default: Fleet configuration is used.",

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think "log level" is the normal phrase.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see. I would then suggest that we use ...log setting... or just setting instead of ...logging setting.... Same suggestion for all other changes that use similar phrasing.

@@ -2176,7 +2205,7 @@ export const AdvancedPolicySchema: AdvancedPolicySchemaType[] = [
'xpack.securitySolution.endpoint.policy.advanced.windows.advanced.events.aggregate_process',
{
defaultMessage:
'Reduce event volume by merging related process events into fewer aggregate events. <=8.17 default: false, >=8.18 default: true',
'Reduce event volume by merging related process events into fewer aggregate events. Default: <=8.17: false, >=8.18: true.',
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Compared to previous Default values above, these default values that are specific to a stack version are confusing to read and understand. For <=8.17, Default: true. For >=8.18 Default: false. might be better and easier to understand and that version info does not go into the input field. Same for other values where we have version specific default values.

Suggested change
'Reduce event volume by merging related process events into fewer aggregate events. Default: <=8.17: false, >=8.18: true.',
'Reduce event volume by merging related process events into fewer aggregate events. For <=8.17, Default: false. For >=8.18, Default: true.',

Why not make it even simpler by saying For 8.17 and below, Default: false. For 8.18 and greater Default: true.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@natasha-moore-elastic do you have an opinion here?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree that this would be easier to read. I'd suggest:

For 8.17 and earlier, default: false. For 8.18 and later, default: true.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍 I updated all options with similar text. e70d2ad

@@ -1003,7 +1017,7 @@ export const AdvancedPolicySchema: AdvancedPolicySchemaType[] = [
'xpack.securitySolution.endpoint.policy.advanced.linux.advanced.memory_protection.enable_shared_dirty_scan',
{
defaultMessage:
'Instead of ignoring regions with just no Private_Dirty bytes, ingore regions with the combination of no Private_Dirty bytes, no Shared_Dirty bytes and is file backed. This has the effect of scanning more memory regions because of the loosened restrictions. Default: true.',
"Instead of ignoring regions with just no 'Private_Dirty' bytes, ignore regions with the combination of no 'Private_Dirty' bytes, no 'Shared_Dirty' bytes and is file-backed. This has the effect of scanning more memory regions because of the loosened restrictions. Default: true.",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure if this explains how to use the input values correctly. Is ignoring memory regions is achieved by not adding Private_Dirty in the input filed? or no Private_Dirty in the input field. Also I think the message should say Instead of ignoring memory regions....?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I updated the wording to say "...ignoring memory regions...". The input type is a boolean, which is implied by Default: true. as we normally do.

@ferullo
Copy link
Contributor Author

ferullo commented Oct 28, 2025

Thanks for all your feedback @ashokaditya . @dasansol92 @ashokaditya I let this PR fall dormant in the run up to 9.2 so I didn't cause conflicts for others, but it's ready for review (again) now.

Please review the backport label and let me know if it should change.

@ferullo
Copy link
Contributor Author

ferullo commented Oct 30, 2025

I would suggest that we get someone from the docs team to proof read the copy changes here.

Sorry @ashokaditya I just noticed this bit. These changes are to align Kibana with the text for this online page, which was proofread by the docs team. So that has happened.

There are a lot of changes in this PR already. Once it merges I'll follow up with another, smaller batch of changes -- again to align with the docs-team-approved online documentation.

@@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ export const AdvancedPolicySchema: AdvancedPolicySchemaType[] = [
'xpack.securitySolution.endpoint.policy.advanced.linux.advanced.logging.file',
{
defaultMessage:
'A supplied value will override the log level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. It is recommended Fleet be used to change this logging in most circumstances. Allowed values are error, warning, info, debug, and trace.',
"Override the log level configured for logs that are saved to disk and streamed to Elasticsearch. Elastic recommends using Fleet to change this logging setting in most circumstances. Allowed values are 'error', 'warning', 'info', 'debug', and 'trace'. Default: Fleet configuration is used.",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see. I would then suggest that we use ...log setting... or just setting instead of ...logging setting.... Same suggestion for all other changes that use similar phrasing.

@ashokaditya
Copy link
Member

ashokaditya commented Nov 3, 2025

Please review the backport label and let me know if it should change.

I don't see any backport labels on the PR yet. Do we want to backport this to 9.2?

@ferullo
Copy link
Contributor Author

ferullo commented Nov 3, 2025

Thanks for review.

I don't see any backport labels on the PR yet. Do we want to backport this to 9.2?

I don't think we need to backport this.

@dasansol92
Copy link
Contributor

@elasticmachine merge upstream

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

elasticmachine commented Nov 11, 2025

💚 Build Succeeded

Metrics [docs]

Async chunks

Total size of all lazy-loaded chunks that will be downloaded as the user navigates the app

id before after diff
securitySolution 11.0MB 11.0MB -45.0B

History

@ferullo ferullo merged commit 58617f9 into elastic:main Nov 12, 2025
12 checks passed
@ferullo ferullo deleted the align-advanced-options branch November 12, 2025 13:32
eokoneyo pushed a commit to eokoneyo/kibana that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2025
…entation (elastic#230269)

## Summary

This aligns the tool-tips shown in Kibana to the same
Docs-Team-approved-text on
https://www.elastic.co/docs/reference/security/defend-advanced-settings
(including a few pending updates in
elastic/docs-content#2365). One new advanced
option is added. It's been missing from Kibana -- it isn't new.

### Checklist

Check the PR satisfies following conditions. 

Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.

- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing
guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses
sentence case text and includes [i18n
support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)

### Identify risks

No risk assuming this renders right in Kibana. It's just tool-tip
wording changes.

---------

Co-authored-by: Ash <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Elastic Machine <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

backport:skip This PR does not require backporting ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment release_note:skip Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes v9.3.0

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants