From: Matthew Booth <mbooth@redhat.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: Linux Audit <linux-audit@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Near Term Audit Road Map
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:59:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49A85440.9080104@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200902271033.21486.sgrubb@redhat.com>
Steve Grubb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With the proposals sent to the list, I wanted to talk about how this might
> play out code-wise. With regard to the current code base, I am working on a
> 1.8 release. This would represent finishing the remote logging app and
> nothing more. The 1.8 series would become just an update series just like the
> 1.0.x series did.
>
> In parallel with finishing remote logging, I would release a 2.0 version.
> Patches applied to 1.8 would also be applied to 2.0. A 2.1 release would
> signify the completion of remote logging that branch. I would recommend this
> branch for all distributions pulling new code in.
>
> The 2.0 branch will also have a couple more changes. I want to split up the
> audit source code a little bit. I want to drop the system-config-audit code
> and let it become standalone package updated and distributed separately.
>
> I also want to drop all audispd-plugins in the 2.0 branch and have them
> released separately. They cause unnecessary build dependencies for the audit
> package.
>
> During the work for a 2.2 release, I would also like to pull the audispd
> program inside auditd. In the past, I tried to keep auditd lean and single
> purpose, but with adding remote logging and kerberos support, we already have
> something that is hard to analyze. So, to improve performance and decrease
> system load, the audit daemon will also do event dispatching.
>
> Would this proposal impact anyone in a Bad Way?
On the contrary. My austream tool was born because:
* Ensuring a dispatcher doesn't generate audit events is fragile
* The additional task switching and memory copying becomes onerous under
load
Additionally, auditd is clearly geared up for writing to disk: certainly
in RHEL 4, switching off all disk related activity is a whole lot of
typing to tell it not to do anything :)
Solaris's BSM implements custom behaviour with loadable modules. If our
auditd did that, hopefully I could deprecate austream. The dispatcher
architecture doesn't lend itself to sustained high volume.
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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-27 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-27 15:33 Near Term Audit Road Map Steve Grubb
2009-02-27 16:13 ` LC Bruzenak
2009-02-27 16:23 ` LC Bruzenak
2009-02-27 16:56 ` Steve Grubb
2009-03-24 16:29 ` audisp-remote and audisp-prelude question LC Bruzenak
2009-03-24 16:41 ` Steve Grubb
2009-03-24 16:55 ` Sebastien Tricaud
2009-03-24 17:30 ` LC Bruzenak
2009-03-24 17:06 ` Steve Grubb
2009-03-24 18:01 ` LC Bruzenak
2009-03-24 18:13 ` Steve Grubb
2009-02-27 20:59 ` Matthew Booth [this message]
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=49A85440.9080104@redhat.com \
--to=mbooth@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.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