From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Grubb Subject: Re: Q on audit, audit-syscall Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 20:34:43 -0400 Message-ID: <200604052034.43208.sgrubb@redhat.com> References: <296FAFD9-3D3E-421C-A474-1998BCB8F718@mac.com> <200604052004.k35K4u56010157@wildsau.enemy.org> <20060405153716.6f71939f.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060405153716.6f71939f.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com On Wednesday 05 April 2006 18:37, Andrew Morton wrote: > Herbert Rosmanith wrote: > > (2) in linux/Documentation/devices.txt I've found an "audit device": > > > > 103 block Audit device > > 0 = /dev/audit Audit device > > hm. I don't think that's true, is it? If not, can we clean > it up please? Hi Andrew, This looks like some Suse documentation. We've never touched the devices.txt file since...well...we don't use any devices. But the documentation may be valid since that may be what they use. You'd probably need to ask someone that maintains Laus if the documentation is for their audit system and accurate. If the devices file is to document only the accepted - in the 2.6 kernel.org kernel, then we should delete that reference. If its to document what has been approved, even if its proprietary, then it should be clarified that its Laus and not the native 2.6 kernel audit system. Hope this helps... -Steve