From: Matthew Booth <mbooth@redhat.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: William Kelly <wkelly@rackspace.com>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, Bret Piatt <bret.piatt@rackspace.com>
Subject: Re: get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:10:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A20A60.8000605@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200808121713.12919.sgrubb@redhat.com>
Steve Grubb wrote:
> If somebody has a better idea/code in hand when we start the 2.0 code, I'd
> like to consider it. The pre-requisites are it has to be backward compatible,
> it has to handle unicode, it has to handle fields with odd characters.
I have thought for some time now that the kernel would do better to
produce binary records. This would have many advantages, including:
* Very simple parsing
* Much faster to parse
* Faster to produce
* Much easier to specify
The production of text would then be the problem of the audit daemon. If
the current text based nightmare were frozen, they could even live
side-by-side.
Matt
--
Matthew Booth, RHCA, RHCSS
Red Hat, Global Professional Services
M: +44 (0)7977 267231
GPG ID: D33C3490
GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-12 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-12 17:49 get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields Jonathan Kelly
2008-08-12 18:05 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:52 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 19:02 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:16 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:13 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:10 ` Matthew Booth [this message]
2008-08-12 23:01 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 19:16 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 20:11 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 20:32 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:09 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:24 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:37 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 0:33 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 15:09 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-13 16:25 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 17:02 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-13 17:30 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-13 18:49 ` Linda Knippers
2008-08-13 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-14 18:25 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-15 13:58 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:10 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-15 15:27 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:15 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-13 16:29 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 22:35 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-08-12 20:57 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:18 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:40 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:53 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:11 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 22:46 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:59 ` Eric Paris
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-13 16:57 Jonathan Kelly
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48A20A60.8000605@redhat.com \
--to=mbooth@redhat.com \
--cc=bret.piatt@rackspace.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=wkelly@rackspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.