Bottom line: Compare the commercial-edition service inventory and explicit trace configuration with the observed Jaeger state before calling it failed; the guide recommends disabling this internal diagnostic tool in normal operation.
\nThe Checkmk site-services guide lists Jaeger as a commercial-edition service that is not enabled by default. Its Jaeger section describes tracing individual request operations to investigate performance bottlenecks. The tool was added primarily for Checkmk development and is active only when trace sending or receiving is explicitly enabled in site configuration. The guide recommends disabling Jaeger during normal operation.
\nThis article scopes an internal diagnostic feature, not a general tracing deployment or proof of a performance defect. It does not approve exposing the diagnostic interface or collecting sensitive request data without an appropriate review.
\nThe following steps are DSE recommendations based on the cited source.
\nDSE recommends comparing the observed component with the expected site configuration before opening a service-failure incident. Record the edition, enabled feature settings and the named process or interface under investigation. Keep the optional diagnostic component separate from the monitoring core and the workload’s own required observations.
\nAsk the site owner whether internal tracing was deliberately enabled and why. If it was not intended, investigate the mismatch in the observation or configuration before turning on additional components. Do not enable Jaeger merely to make a service list resemble the documentation’s illustrative status output.
\nWhere a diagnostic session is separately approved, name the exact performance question, permitted trace population and handling requirements. Follow the installed-release procedure and protect diagnostic access. Keep any measurement claim unresolved until actual observations support it; the presence of a tracing tool is not a diagnosis.
\nAgree on the intended normal configuration and who checks it after the session. Preserve the initial settings and record any authorized temporary change. Have the monitoring owner assess the normal service’s health independently, so either an absent diagnostic component or a populated trace view cannot substitute for the required operational check.
\nProposed verification: inspect a representative test site’s edition, trace settings and actual service observations against the written expectation. Use a disabled-normal configuration as one clearly labeled case. Record a discrepancy without assuming that a missing optional component means the monitoring core failed.
\nIf an approved diagnostic case is exercised, retain the selected settings, safe request scope and actual observations, then verify the intended normal settings afterward. Keep trace contents under the agreed access restrictions. Report only the configuration and diagnostic behavior observed, without claiming a performance improvement or a completed fault diagnosis.
\nSource review completed October 30, 2026. Recheck the official documentation and deployment-specific applicability before a production change.
\n", "content_text": "Bottom line: Compare the commercial-edition service inventory and explicit trace configuration with the observed Jaeger state before calling it failed; the guide recommends disabling this internal diagnostic tool in normal operation.\nSource fact: what the authority says\nThe Checkmk site-services guide lists Jaeger as a commercial-edition service that is not enabled by default. Its Jaeger section describes tracing individual request operations to investigate performance bottlenecks. The tool was added primarily for Checkmk development and is active only when trace sending or receiving is explicitly enabled in site configuration. The guide recommends disabling Jaeger during normal operation.\nWhat the source does not establish\nThis article scopes an internal diagnostic feature, not a general tracing deployment or proof of a performance defect. It does not approve exposing the diagnostic interface or collecting sensitive request data without an appropriate review.\nApplicability questions\n\nWhat Checkmk edition and site configuration govern the observed service list?\nAre trace sending or receiving explicitly intended to be enabled?\nIs there an approved internal diagnostic requirement for Jaeger?\nWhich separate signal establishes the health of the actual monitoring function?\n\nDSE recommendation: controlled next steps\nThe following steps are DSE recommendations based on the cited source.\nDSE recommends comparing the observed component with the expected site configuration before opening a service-failure incident. Record the edition, enabled feature settings and the named process or interface under investigation. Keep the optional diagnostic component separate from the monitoring core and the workload’s own required observations.\nAsk the site owner whether internal tracing was deliberately enabled and why. If it was not intended, investigate the mismatch in the observation or configuration before turning on additional components. Do not enable Jaeger merely to make a service list resemble the documentation’s illustrative status output.\nWhere a diagnostic session is separately approved, name the exact performance question, permitted trace population and handling requirements. Follow the installed-release procedure and protect diagnostic access. Keep any measurement claim unresolved until actual observations support it; the presence of a tracing tool is not a diagnosis.\nAgree on the intended normal configuration and who checks it after the session. Preserve the initial settings and record any authorized temporary change. Have the monitoring owner assess the normal service’s health independently, so either an absent diagnostic component or a populated trace view cannot substitute for the required operational check.\nVerification and evidence\nProposed verification: inspect a representative test site’s edition, trace settings and actual service observations against the written expectation. Use a disabled-normal configuration as one clearly labeled case. Record a discrepancy without assuming that a missing optional component means the monitoring core failed.\nIf an approved diagnostic case is exercised, retain the selected settings, safe request scope and actual observations, then verify the intended normal settings afterward. Keep trace contents under the agreed access restrictions. Report only the configuration and diagnostic behavior observed, without claiming a performance improvement or a completed fault diagnosis.\nOfficial references\n\nCheckmk — Site services – Checkmk under the hood — official product documentation; confirm the installed release and configuration.\n\nSource review completed October 30, 2026. Recheck the official documentation and deployment-specific applicability before a production change.", "content_markdown": "Bottom line: Compare the commercial-edition service inventory and explicit trace configuration with the observed Jaeger state before calling it failed; the guide recommends disabling this internal diagnostic tool in normal operation.\n\n## Source fact: what the authority says\n\nThe [Checkmk site-services guide](https://docs.checkmk.com/latest/en/cmk_processes.html) lists Jaeger as a commercial-edition service that is not enabled by default. Its Jaeger section describes tracing individual request operations to investigate performance bottlenecks. The tool was added primarily for Checkmk development and is active only when trace sending or receiving is explicitly enabled in site configuration. The guide recommends disabling Jaeger during normal operation.\n\n## What the source does not establish\n\nThis article scopes an internal diagnostic feature, not a general tracing deployment or proof of a performance defect. It does not approve exposing the diagnostic interface or collecting sensitive request data without an appropriate review.\n\n## Applicability questions\n\n- What Checkmk edition and site configuration govern the observed service list?\n\n- Are trace sending or receiving explicitly intended to be enabled?\n\n- Is there an approved internal diagnostic requirement for Jaeger?\n\n- Which separate signal establishes the health of the actual monitoring function?\n\n## DSE recommendation: controlled next steps\n\nThe following steps are DSE recommendations based on the cited source.\n\nDSE recommends comparing the observed component with the expected site configuration before opening a service-failure incident. Record the edition, enabled feature settings and the named process or interface under investigation. Keep the optional diagnostic component separate from the monitoring core and the workload’s own required observations.\n\nAsk the site owner whether internal tracing was deliberately enabled and why. If it was not intended, investigate the mismatch in the observation or configuration before turning on additional components. Do not enable Jaeger merely to make a service list resemble the documentation’s illustrative status output.\n\nWhere a diagnostic session is separately approved, name the exact performance question, permitted trace population and handling requirements. Follow the installed-release procedure and protect diagnostic access. Keep any measurement claim unresolved until actual observations support it; the presence of a tracing tool is not a diagnosis.\n\nAgree on the intended normal configuration and who checks it after the session. Preserve the initial settings and record any authorized temporary change. Have the monitoring owner assess the normal service’s health independently, so either an absent diagnostic component or a populated trace view cannot substitute for the required operational check.\n\n## Verification and evidence\n\nProposed verification: inspect a representative test site’s edition, trace settings and actual service observations against the written expectation. Use a disabled-normal configuration as one clearly labeled case. Record a discrepancy without assuming that a missing optional component means the monitoring core failed.\n\nIf an approved diagnostic case is exercised, retain the selected settings, safe request scope and actual observations, then verify the intended normal settings afterward. Keep trace contents under the agreed access restrictions. Report only the configuration and diagnostic behavior observed, without claiming a performance improvement or a completed fault diagnosis.\n\n## Official references\n\n- [Checkmk — Site services – Checkmk under the hood](https://docs.checkmk.com/latest/en/cmk_processes.html) — official product documentation; confirm the installed release and configuration.\n\nSource review completed October 30, 2026. Recheck the official documentation and deployment-specific applicability before a production change." }, "json_ld": { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization", "name": "Detection Systems & Engineering", "alternateName": "DSE Security", "url": "https://dsesecurity.com/", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/dse-logo-20260812.png?v=1.8.20" } }, { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#editorial-team", "name": "DSE Security Editorial Team", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/", "parentOrganization": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" } }, { "@type": "WebSite", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#website", "name": "DSE Updates", "alternateName": "DSE Security Knowledge Hub", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/", "inLanguage": "en-US", "publisher": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "potentialAction": { "@type": "SearchAction", "target": { "@type": "EntryPoint", "urlTemplate": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/?q={search_term_string}" }, "query-input": "required name=search_term_string" } }, { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#website" }, "lastReviewed": "2026-10-30" }, { "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/#breadcrumbs", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "DSE Updates", "item": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Cybersecurity", "item": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/cybersecurity/" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Check the expected Jaeger state before diagnosing a failed Checkmk service", "item": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/" } ] }, { "@type": [ "Article", "TechArticle" ], "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/#article", "identifier": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/", "headline": "Check the expected Jaeger state before diagnosing a failed Checkmk service", "description": "Compare the expected optional tracing service with edition and configuration before treating an inactive Jaeger component as a fault.", "abstract": "Compare the expected optional tracing service with edition and configuration before treating an inactive Jaeger component as a fault.", "articleBody": "Bottom line: Compare the commercial-edition service inventory and explicit trace configuration with the observed Jaeger state before calling it failed; the guide recommends disabling this internal diagnostic tool in normal operation.\nSource fact: what the authority says\nThe Checkmk site-services guide lists Jaeger as a commercial-edition service that is not enabled by default. Its Jaeger section describes tracing individual request operations to investigate performance bottlenecks. The tool was added primarily for Checkmk development and is active only when trace sending or receiving is explicitly enabled in site configuration. The guide recommends disabling Jaeger during normal operation.\nWhat the source does not establish\nThis article scopes an internal diagnostic feature, not a general tracing deployment or proof of a performance defect. It does not approve exposing the diagnostic interface or collecting sensitive request data without an appropriate review.\nApplicability questions\n\nWhat Checkmk edition and site configuration govern the observed service list?\nAre trace sending or receiving explicitly intended to be enabled?\nIs there an approved internal diagnostic requirement for Jaeger?\nWhich separate signal establishes the health of the actual monitoring function?\n\nDSE recommendation: controlled next steps\nThe following steps are DSE recommendations based on the cited source.\nDSE recommends comparing the observed component with the expected site configuration before opening a service-failure incident. Record the edition, enabled feature settings and the named process or interface under investigation. Keep the optional diagnostic component separate from the monitoring core and the workload’s own required observations.\nAsk the site owner whether internal tracing was deliberately enabled and why. If it was not intended, investigate the mismatch in the observation or configuration before turning on additional components. Do not enable Jaeger merely to make a service list resemble the documentation’s illustrative status output.\nWhere a diagnostic session is separately approved, name the exact performance question, permitted trace population and handling requirements. Follow the installed-release procedure and protect diagnostic access. Keep any measurement claim unresolved until actual observations support it; the presence of a tracing tool is not a diagnosis.\nAgree on the intended normal configuration and who checks it after the session. Preserve the initial settings and record any authorized temporary change. Have the monitoring owner assess the normal service’s health independently, so either an absent diagnostic component or a populated trace view cannot substitute for the required operational check.\nVerification and evidence\nProposed verification: inspect a representative test site’s edition, trace settings and actual service observations against the written expectation. Use a disabled-normal configuration as one clearly labeled case. Record a discrepancy without assuming that a missing optional component means the monitoring core failed.\nIf an approved diagnostic case is exercised, retain the selected settings, safe request scope and actual observations, then verify the intended normal settings afterward. Keep trace contents under the agreed access restrictions. Report only the configuration and diagnostic behavior observed, without claiming a performance improvement or a completed fault diagnosis.\nOfficial references\n\nCheckmk — Site services – Checkmk under the hood — official product documentation; confirm the installed release and configuration.\n\nSource review completed October 30, 2026. Recheck the official documentation and deployment-specific applicability before a production change.", "datePublished": "2026-10-30T06:46:51+00:00", "dateModified": "2026-10-30T06:47:29+00:00", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/" }, "inLanguage": "en-US", "isAccessibleForFree": true, "author": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "DSE Security Editorial Team", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#editorial-team" }, "publisher": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/check-the-expected-jaeger-state-before-diagnosing-a-failed-checkmk-service/#primaryimage", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-social-v2.jpg?v=1.8.20", "contentUrl": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-social-v2.jpg?v=1.8.20", "width": 1200, "height": 630, "caption": "Check the expected Jaeger state before diagnosing a failed Checkmk service" }, "articleSection": [ "Cybersecurity", "IT" ], "keywords": [ "Cybersecurity", "IT", "Guide", "Advisory priority" ], "genre": "Guide", "about": [ { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Cybersecurity", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/cybersecurity/" }, { "@type": "Thing", "name": "IT", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/it/" } ], "wordCount": 514, "timeRequired": "PT3M", "publishingPrinciples": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/dse-updates-editorial-methodology/", "usageInfo": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/usage/", "copyrightHolder": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "copyrightNotice": "Copyright © 2026 Detection Systems & Engineering. All rights reserved.", "citation": { "@type": "CreativeWork", "name": "Checkmk — Site services - Checkmk under the hood", "url": "https://docs.checkmk.com/latest/en/cmk_processes.html" } } ] } }