Re: Audit Parsing Library Requirements
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 13:53 -0600, Klaus Weidner wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 01:42:00PM -0600, LC Bruzenak wrote:
> That to me means that the field names are not unique; hence my question.
There's two separate issues here:
- audit records that contain the same field name twice for different
purposes in a single record. I think this happens in a couple of places
where uid or something like that is re-used. My preference would be to
consider this a bug in the audit generation that needs fixing, instead
of having the parser handle it. (As a side note, any remaining tag names
containing spaces should also be fixed...)
Yes, and the audit scanner(s) would have to handle/accommodate this
also.
In this scheme is there a distinction between name/value pairs supplied
by the kernel vice those added by userspace or audit-aware applications?
LCB.
--
LC Bruzenak
lenny(a)bruzenak.com