What this category of data looks like
Data for this category primarily comes from WAF, IDS, firewalls, and threat intelligence platforms. Update frequency is daily or triggered by protection events. Daily produced documents include rule change tickets, intercept logs, false positive analysis reports, and policy rollback records. Rule change tickets must include rule ID, effective time, and change content fields. Intercept logs record request sources, intercept rules, and response statuses. False positive analysis reports must mark false positive trigger conditions and business impact scope. All document fields follow the lifecycle of protection policies, and only include content required for maintenance.
What constraints these characteristics impose on forms and interactions
Data sources are scattered and update schedules are flexible. Forms must support fast import of multi-source logs and real-time field verification. Daily document fields are designed around the protection policy lifecycle. Fixed required field order must be used to avoid configuration omissions. Errors directly impact business or cause customer complaints. Forms must add a risk confirmation step before submission. Forms must also support temporary saving and batch submission to adapt to high-frequency update needs triggered by events. Redundant interaction options unrelated to protection policy maintenance must be disabled.
How to configure settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Form input node formInput | Test example: Select 3 fields from security product rule operation fields as required inputs. Actual fields are determined by the task | This node collects user input. Missing required items requires checking interaction status to avoid subsequent nodes failing to receive complete input |
User selection node userSelect | Test example: Set 2 business options, check corresponding branches one by one | This node handles user selection. Queries and filtering for security product rule operation records must be implemented by subsequent interfaces or external systems |
| Field passing after submission | Test example: Prepare 10 security product rule operation input samples, covering full completion, missing required items, and canceled operations | Compare input and node output to verify whether subsequent nodes receive corresponding fields. Result thresholds are determined by actual tasks |
| External implementation item: Risk pop-up before form submission | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Configure the pre-submission risk confirmation link via the external business system. Recommended pop-up prompt content: A rule change will be triggered, please confirm there is no business impact (test example) | Avoid risks of normal business interception or missed attacks caused by incorrect submissions |
| External implementation item: Temporary save function | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Configure the temporary save function via the external business system. Recommended save period is 7 days (test example) | Adapt to high-frequency update needs triggered by events, avoid losing unfinished configurations |
| External implementation item: Multi-source data import | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Support importing up to 50 WAF/IDS log formats via the external business system or subsequent nodes (test example) | Match the data sources of this category, reduce the workload of manually entering intercept logs |
Three common mistakes
- Symptom: Field truncation error occurs when submitting a rule change ticket. Verification step: Check the external verification rule configuration associated with the form input node. Confirm whether the input length limit matches the daily document specification for rule change content.
- Symptom: The submitted change ticket is associated with an incorrect identity, and the operator cannot be traced. Verification step: Check whether the user selection node is associated with external preset operator options. Confirm that the submitted change ticket can correctly associate operation records for the corresponding role.
- Symptom: Unable to pull intercept logs for the corresponding WAF. Verification step: Check the association rule configuration between the form and external data sources. Confirm whether it matches the data source format of this category.
How to confirm proper configuration
- Submit a test rule change ticket. Check whether the external verification rule takes effect. A corresponding prompt will pop up when the input length limit is exceeded.
- Select a preset user selection option configured externally. Confirm that the submitted change ticket correctly associates operation records for the corresponding role.
- Simulate submitting an unreviewed change ticket by mistake. Check whether the externally configured risk confirmation link triggers a pop-up. Complete the submission only after confirmation.
- Import intercept logs in WAF format. Check whether the external data import tool automatically identifies and fills corresponding fields, with no manual format adjustment required.
The values provided here are common starting points, and should be evaluated against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-10-19.