Hi Kamil,
The first variant is with the idea that although CPE should be used, the IEP is open also for products not included in the CPE dictionary.
Yes, for this reason I think variant 1
`product.name` -> `product.full_name` (human-readable name) `product.product` -> `product.name` (product name as in CPE)
is the better solution.
- Thomas
On 06.02.24 12:50, Kamil Mankowski via IntelMQ-dev wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Nice to hear you like it! What would you say about those two variants:
- Rename two fields, like:
`product.name` -> `product.full_name` (human-readable name) `product.product` -> `product.name` (product name as in CPE)
- Rename just one:
`product.product` -> `product.cpe_name`
I think it would be easier to read.
The first variant is with the idea that although CPE should be used, the IEP is open also for products not included in the CPE dictionary.
Best regards
// Kamil Mańkowski mankowski@cert.at - T: +43 676 898 298 7204 // CERT Austria - https://www.cert.at/ // CERT.at GmbH, FB-Nr. 561772k, HG Wien
On 2/6/24 11:04, Thomas Hungenberg wrote:
Hi Kamil,
I like your proposal very much!
However, "product.product" sounds a bit confusing. Maybe this can be changed to "product.cpename" or something like that?
- Thomas