From: Matthew Booth <mbooth@redhat.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: William Kelly <wkelly@rackspace.com>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, Bret Piatt <bret.piatt@rackspace.com>
Subject: Re: get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:10:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A20A60.8000605@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200808121713.12919.sgrubb@redhat.com>
Steve Grubb wrote:
> If somebody has a better idea/code in hand when we start the 2.0 code, I'd
> like to consider it. The pre-requisites are it has to be backward compatible,
> it has to handle unicode, it has to handle fields with odd characters.
I have thought for some time now that the kernel would do better to
produce binary records. This would have many advantages, including:
* Very simple parsing
* Much faster to parse
* Faster to produce
* Much easier to specify
The production of text would then be the problem of the audit daemon. If
the current text based nightmare were frozen, they could even live
side-by-side.
Matt
--
Matthew Booth, RHCA, RHCSS
Red Hat, Global Professional Services
M: +44 (0)7977 267231
GPG ID: D33C3490
GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-12 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-12 17:49 get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields Jonathan Kelly
2008-08-12 18:05 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:52 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 19:02 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:16 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:13 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:10 ` Matthew Booth [this message]
2008-08-12 23:01 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 19:16 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 20:11 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 20:32 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:09 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:24 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:37 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 0:33 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 15:09 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-13 16:25 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 17:02 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-13 17:30 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-13 18:49 ` Linda Knippers
2008-08-13 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-14 18:25 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-15 13:58 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:10 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-15 15:27 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:15 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-13 16:29 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 22:35 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-08-12 20:57 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:18 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:40 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:53 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:11 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 22:46 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:59 ` Eric Paris
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-13 16:57 Jonathan Kelly
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48A20A60.8000605@redhat.com \
--to=mbooth@redhat.com \
--cc=bret.piatt@rackspace.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=wkelly@rackspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox