control: severity -1 normal
control: tags -1 - wontfix + confirmed
thanks
This bug is an example of the confusion and limitstions caused by the
current implementation of the violations.d mechanism alongside (but with
different logic and code) the 'reportlevels' choice.
I've got a proof of concept
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, maximilian attems said:
> > no it can't be placed there below, as security events don't have the
> > three level filtering.
>
> Is that not changeable? I honestly don't know, not having looked at the
> code for logcheck. I
This one time, at band camp, maximilian attems said:
> hello stephen,
>
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Stephen Gran wrote:
>
> > I would like to be able to selectively ignore sudo on some systems
> > and not on others without being forced to just rm a conffile. The file
> > /etc/logcheck/violations.igno
hello stephen,
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I would like to be able to selectively ignore sudo on some systems
> and not on others without being forced to just rm a conffile. The file
> /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/logcheck-sudo (ISTM) is better placed
> in /etc/logcheck/ignor
4 matches
Mail list logo
