opentelemetry-collector VS bettercap

But how does one monitor a Collector? The OTel Collector already emits metrics for the purposes of its own monitoring. These can then be sent to your Observability backend for monitoring.

Maybe, you are asking yourself: "But I already had instrumented my applications with vendor-specific libraries and I'm using their agents and monitoring tools, why should I change to OpenTelemetry?". The answer is: maybe you're right and I don't want to encourage you to update the way how you are doing observability in your applications, that's a hard and complex task. But, if you are starting from scratch or you are not happy with your current observability infrastructure, OpenTelemetry is the best choice, independently of the backend telemetry tool that you are using. I would like to invite you to take a look at the number of exporters available in the collector contrib section, if your backend tracing tool is not there, probably it's already using the Open Telemetry Protocol (OTLP) and you will be able to use the core collector. Otherwise, you should consider changing your backend telemetry tool or contributing to the project creating a new exporter.

To receive OTLP data, you set up the standard otlp receiver to receive data in HTTP or gRPC format. To forward traces and metrics, a batch processor was defined to accumulate data and send it every 100 milliseconds. Then set up a connection to Tempo (in otlp/tempo exporter, with a standard top exporter) and to Prometheus (in prometheus exporter, with a control exporter). A debug exporter also was added to log info on container standard I/O and see how the collector is working.

You can find more details on advanced configurations here.

> opentelemetry is basically a house of antipatterns

"Look on My Works Ye Mighty and Despair!"

https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector/tr... -> https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-re... ... and then a reasonable person trying to load that mess into their head may ask 'err, what's the difference between go.opentelemetry.io/collector and github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib?'

  $ curl -fsS go.opentelemetry.io/collector | grep go-import

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector: OpenTelemetry Collector (github.com)

There are 2 collector types: the core and the contrib. I have used the contrib as it features the splunk_hec exporter.

We are setting the deployment to have exactly 1 replica and setting the container CPU and memory limits according to the minimum that was checked for performance in their docs.

Lightstep ingests data in native OpenTelemetry Protocol (OTLP) format, so we will use the OTLP Exporter. The exporter can be called either otlp or follow the naming format otlp/. We could call it otlp/bob if we wanted to. We're calling our exporter otlp/ls to signal to us that we are using the OTLP exporter to send the data to Lightstep.

Then, we set up a batch processor that batches up the spans together and every 1 second sends the batch forward. In production, you would want more than 1 second, but I set this here to 1 second for instant feedback in Jaeger.

you can do this with Bettercap

I've been learning some common lisp, reading through Practical Common Lisp, and it's really neat. People say the good ideas of lisp got adapted in other languages and sure that's true of garbage collection, lambda's and some others, but I'm seeing plenty incredible stuff I haven't seen elsewhere, the condition system that among other things lets you fix and resume your program on exception, real interactive development, flexible object system, macros way more understandable than in other languages with AST macros as in lisp the AST is simple, an expressive dynamic language at high level of ruby and python while being an order of magnitude faster performance. Quicklisp also is really neat, how many other package managers can load new dependencies without restarting your application? And I was learning it with idea that it's not just of historical or hobby interest but legitimately a good choice I can use for new programming projects today for many tasks, but I just learned something that makes it impossible for me to consider, which is complete lack of security of quicklisp. You go to the website and see sha256 hash and PGP signature for quicklisp download, awesome it seems at the security standard you expect for a package manager. But then the actual quicklisp client does all downloads over http with no verification. What this means in practical terms is basically if you use quicklisp, anyone on your local network can easily hack your computer, by MITM (man-in-the-middle) the traffic and serving you backdoored software when you install packages from quicklisp. mitm6 will MITM windows machines on normal networks, bettercap can MITM linux and os x on most networks. Aside from attackers on your local network there's plenty other scenarios, you can go near office of CL using company and set up a open WIFI access point with same name as company wifi and hack their developers, using quicklisp over something like Tor is extremely dangerous at present as it would let the exit node backdoor the packages you download, and then in less likely but still should be protected against scenarios is just if quicklisp.org or any router between you and it is compromised, you can be hacked.

Bettercap – Swiss Army Knife for 802.11, BLE, IPv4 and IPv6 Networks\ (5 comments)