On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:14:32 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 14/12/03, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Sunday, November 23, 2014 09:58:48 AM Eric Paris wrote: > > > [forwarding to 2 people looking at audit now, do you mind resending to > > > [email protected] and inluding them both?] > > > > I'm also adding the linux-audit list to the CC line. > > > > I know Richard has been working on namespaces/audit, I'd like to hear his > > comments on this patch. > > At first when I saw this, I wondered if it was even necessary, thinking > that information should either be irrelevant, or available elsewhere. > > Given that it could be several nested pid namespaces, it may even be > incomplete.
Okay, thanks for the input. It doesn't look like this is something we want to merge at this point. > The most obvious one is that of vanishing fields in audit log messages > which concerns Steve Grubb. If we fixed the ordering issue, vanishing > fields should no longer be a concern. Yes, this is just one more reason why we need to rework the audit record format. I've got more ideas on this since we last talked on-list, but I've had to shelve things a bit to deal with the audit bugs. However, make no mistake, the audit record format will be changing, this fixed string format is garbage. -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat -- Linux-audit mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
