audit 2.3.6 released

[Burn Alting]

Steve,

Please find a patch against 2.3.6 that, when checkpointing, ausearch
will only use the recorded event time in the checkpoint file when
deciding what complete events to display. Basically, it will display all
complete events found after the event time found in the checkpoint file.

Normally, one would use checkpointing in a periodic script that records
all 'new' audit events. Should certain errors occur, we need to recover
and continue to record 'new' audit events. This option allows use to do
a  'brute force' recovery by finding all events since the last recorded
time we have in the checkpoint file.

For example, the core of a periodic script may contain

  ausearch --checkpoint /usr/security/auditd_checkpoint.txt -i
  _aus=$?
  if test ${_aus} -eq 10 -o ${_aus} -eq 11 -o ${_aus} -eq 12
  then
    ausearch --checkpoint /usr/security/auditd_checkpoint.txt \
      --checkpoint-time-only -i
  fi


Rgds

On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 20:11 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Sunday, April 13, 2014 11:51:45 AM Burn Alting wrote:
> > A patch is attached that addresses this.
> > 
> > Essentially the modification 
> > - notices if we identify an audit.log file to use but we do not find the
> > recorded audit event in that log file and so report an error (to stderr)
> > and return a new exit code (12)
> > - allows checkpointing to only use the recorded time from the checkpoint
> > file for comparisons.
> 
> I'd like to look at these two pieces separately. Let's have 1 bug/feature per 
> patch. This way if something looks good, it can be applied immediately. 
> Whereas if something needs more discussion, it would block application of the 
> part that is good.
> 
> 
> > You will note that the patch also contains changes to swig/audit.py.
> > Although this file is automatically generated, it is part of the 2.3.6
> > release ... should it be?
> 
> I suppose it should be. What is in the release is decided by 
> automake/autoconf. If there are any mistakes in the Makefile.am file, I would 
> take a patch.
> 
> 
> > I also note that a lot of Makefile.in's are also part of the release. Again,
> > should these automatically generated files be part of the release?
> 
> The audit package release is done by a script that pretty much does the 
> following (its way more complicated than this, but this is the essential 
> pieces):
> 
> mkdir audit
> cd audit
> svn co http://svn.fedorahosted.org/svn/audit/trunk .
> ./autogen.sh
> ./configure
> make -j 8 distcheck
> 
> If it finishes saying it created the tar ball, I send it to rawhide to make 
> sure it builds on a current OS. If that is also successful, then I push it to 
> my people page and then commit a branch in svn. I also run the development 
> audit package on all my systems during the whole development cycle to make 
> sure bugs are fixed, nothing new shows up, and its builds under normal 
> conditions.
> 
> So, anything that is there, is because autotools think it should be there 
> unless I made a mistake in a Makefile.am. :-) Patches are welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Steve

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: audit-2.3.6_checkpt_2.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 5868 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/attachments/20140418/a2eb3014/attachment.bin>