From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Watch Performance
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:13:36 -0400
Message-ID: <200604211113.36940.sgrubb@redhat.com>
References: <200604081221.58080.sgrubb@redhat.com>
	<20060417200656.GA31654@w-m-p.com>
	<20060421150104.GA32595@zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060421150104.GA32595@zk3.dec.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-audit@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
To: linux-audit@redhat.com
Cc: redhat-lspp@redhat.com
List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com

On Friday 21 April 2006 11:01, Amy Griffis wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 10:27:34AM -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> > > Maybe this is a completely stupid thought, but what about the optio=
n of
> > > adding a per-syscall filter list table, indexed by system-call numb=
er.
>
> This approach makes a lot of sense to me. =A0I think it would be a good
> next-step for audit filtering.

Al, proposed a different solution. You might want to check with him for=20
details. It was discussed at the Monday Telecon.

-Steve