From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Klaus Weidner Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPC_SET_PERM cleanup Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 12:11:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20060510171150.GH31457@w-m-p.com> References: <445BB351.2040303@hp.com> <20060509203608.GF31457@w-m-p.com> <4460FFA6.4070506@hp.com> <200605101002.31857.sgrubb@redhat.com> <20060510162902.GG31457@w-m-p.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4AHC6ov023181 for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 13:12:06 -0400 Received: from mail.atsec.com (mail.atsec.com [195.30.252.105]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4AHC4Ct030554 for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 13:12:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com To: Dustin Kirkland Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 12:02:12PM -0500, Dustin Kirkland wrote: > What about a new field in the audit records that is a bitmask, wherein > bits are flipped on for each field being a "new" or "updated" field? > > Example: > > type=IPC_SET_PERM msg=audit(1146863632.117:98): new_qbytes=0 new_iuid=501 > new_igid=0 new_mode=0 > > becomes: > > type=IPC_SET_PERM msg=audit(1146863632.117:98) new=1111: qbytes=0 iuid=501 > igid=0 mode=0 I'm not sure that's really necessary, the type=IPC_SET_PERM already tells you that these are new values. How about simply the following: type=IPC_SET_PERM msg=audit(1146863632.117:98): qbytes=0 iuid=501 igid=0 mode=0 -Klaus