On Wednesday 17 June 2009, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Wednesday 17 June 2009 23:48:38 Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:31:24 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > I can't argue with that. I just get a little paranoid about auth logs > > > being sent (with credentials) over partially-open networks, hence the > > > attraction of encrypted traffic > > > > What about using an SSH tunnel? > > I thought about that - people other than me set up most of the machines and > this may or may not be easy for them to do in practice. I'm sure you've > seen how easy it is for otherwise smart people to royally screw up anything > with ssh in it's name... > > Just keeping my options open, maybe there's something better suited to what > I need than vanilla syslog-ng
Perhaps rsyslog? http://www.rsyslog.com ======================================== "Among others, it offers support for on-demand disk buffering, reliable syslog over TCP, SSL, TLS and RELP, writing to databases (MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, and many more), email alerting, fully configurable output formats (including high-precision timestamps), the ability to filter on any part of the syslog message, on-the-wire message compression, and the ability to convert text files to syslog. It is a drop-in replacement for stock syslogd and able to work with the same configuration file syntax." ======================================== It's in portage. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
