On Thursday, March 14, 2013 10:10:42 PM Burn Alting wrote:
 OK. So, in essence, the example I provided is a just poorly
formatted
 event from PAM. Or rather, one that can't be parsed by the auparse
 library without loss of data. 
I think that is a fair assessment. Sometimes changes get made to the events 
without understanding how they affect people that really need correct audit 
events. For example, shadow-utils upstream made changes and without any 
coordination. Now there are about 200 places that need patching to fix all the 
audit problems.
-Steve
 On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 06:54 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
 > On Thursday, March 14, 2013 09:21:30 PM Burn Alting wrote:
 > > As you can see, we have lost the 'password' element of the
 > > 
 > > 	"op=change password"
 > > 
 > > key value pair in the original event.
 > > 
 > > Is this a feature or bug???
 > 
 > Its a feature. The only thing guaranteed by the audit system is that
 > name=value pairs are supported. Additional text may be there to add
 > context
 > for people reading the event. But for machine parsing only name=value is
 > returned. So, if the additional text is needed, then either '-' or
'_' can
 > be added between words (as many other events do).
 > 
 > -Steve