[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200711290845.46623.paul.moore@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:45:46 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-audit@...hat.com,
Joy Latten <latten@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] XFRM: SPD auditing fix to include the netmask/prefix-length
On Thursday 29 November 2007 5:34:59 am Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 07:55:12PM +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
> > Currently the netmask/prefix-length of an IPsec SPD entry is not included
> > in any of the SPD related audit messages. This can cause a problem when
> > the audit log is examined as the netmask/prefix-length is vital in
> > determining what network traffic is affected by a particular SPD entry.
> > This patch fixes this problem by adding two additional fields,
> > "src_prefixlen" and "dst_prefixlen", to the SPD audit messages to
> > indicate the source and destination netmasks. These new fields are only
> > included in the audit message when the netmask/prefix-length is less than
> > the address length, i.e. the SPD entry applies to a network address and
> > not a host address.
>
> Any reason why we don't just always include them?
The audit folks seem to be very sensitive to the size/length of the audit
messages, they prefer they be as small as possible. I thought that one way
to save space would be to only print the prefix length information when the
address referred to a network and not a single host.
Would you prefer it if the prefix length information was always included in
the audit message? Joy? Audit folks?
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists