From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael C Thompson <thompsmc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: auditctl usage for filter lists: "user" , "watch" and "exclude"
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:01:55 -0500
Message-ID: <446CC4A3.2010409@us.ibm.com>
References: <446C8915.20606@us.ibm.com> <200605181158.43975.sgrubb@redhat.com>
	<446C9B15.1030306@us.ibm.com>
	<200605181216.20424.sgrubb@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <200605181216.20424.sgrubb@redhat.com>
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: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com
List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com

Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Thursday 18 May 2006 12:04, Michael C Thompson wrote:
>> So then it should be safe to say that having two -F msgtype=... is an
>> invalid construct for a rule? Since messages have only 1 type?
> 
> Only if they are using the '=' operator. Other operators might be valid to 
> have multiple -F msgtype.

Ah yes, good point. I'll be sure to properly test the relational 
operators. Other than the source code, is there any place for a user to 
go and get the message types to determine their ordering?

Mike