Re: [RFC][PATCH] audit: log join and part events to the read-only multicast log socket

[Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>]

On 14/10/07, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 14/10/07, Eric Paris wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 14:23 -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > > Log the event when a client attempts to connect to the netlink audit multicast
> > > socket, requiring CAP_AUDIT_READ capability, binding to the AUDIT_NLGRP_READLOG
> > > group.  Log the disconnect too.

> > super crazy yuck.  audit_log_task_info() ??
> 
> I agree.  I already suggested that a while ago.  I'd love to.  sgrubb
> thinks it dumps way too much info.  We still haven't got a definitive
> answer about what is enough and what is too much info for any given type
> of record.
> 
> I also thought of moving audit_log_task() from auditsc.c to audit.c
> and using that.  For that matter, both audit_log_task() and
> audit_log_task_info() could use audit_log_session_info(), but they are
> in slightly different order of keywords which will upset sgrubb's
> parser.
> 
> What to do?
> 
> Another paragraph I'd like to see added to
> 	http://people.redhat.com/sgrubb/audit/audit-parse.txt
> would be a "canonical order" of keywords.  However, that discussion went
> nowhere.  Would it be reasonable to suggest only two possible orders
> instead of the almost infinite iterations possible and declare a
> standard order of keywords and gradually move to it?

Steve,

Can we agree to *two* orders (instead of the full set of iterations) for
these keywords so that we can start to sort things in a canonical order?
This random order per type of audit log message is chaos.

> - RGB

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs@redhat.com>
Senior Software Engineer, Kernel Security, AMER ENG Base Operating Systems, Red Hat
Remote, Ottawa, Canada
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635, Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545