appsec: implement more telemetry metrics/tags

[cataphract]

Description

See individual commits

Reviewer checklist

• Test coverage seems ok.
• Appropriate labels assigned.

[datadog-official]

 

✨ Unblock PR with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 7 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | Loader test on amd64 libc: [7.3, nts]     

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | test_extension_ci: [8.0]     

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | test_extension_ci: [8.1]     

View all 7 failed jobs.

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🔄 Datadog auto-retried 1 job - 1 passed on retry

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 69.09%
• Overall Coverage: 60.68% (+0.05%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 2d0424e | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cd3dbadbaf

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks [ appsec ]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-08-05 17:21:10

Comparing candidate commit 2d0424e in PR branch glopes/appsec-more-tel-metrics with baseline commit 89b12c4 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 12 metrics, 0 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

[estringana]

Why would you calculate this when DD_APPSEC_RASP_ENABLED is false?

[cataphract]

If DD_APPSEC_RASP_ENABLED is false and is_rasp is true, we will have returned on line 588. So add neither the metric on the next line (613) nor the new one I add on line 595. Does this answer your question?