Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:48:51 -0800 (PST) From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> To: Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: periodic security run output gives false positives after 1 year Message-ID: <20120217194851.D76DE1065670@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAE-mSO%2Bsa2Cu0aQksEXGyMnyns3=aAL8odmzQNMEJ77dpUAgmw@mail.gmail.com> References: <20120217120034.201EB106574C@hub.freebsd.org> <20120217152400.261AC106564A@hub.freebsd.org> <CAE-mSO%2Bsa2Cu0aQksEXGyMnyns3=aAL8odmzQNMEJ77dpUAgmw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012, Sergey Kandaurov wrote: >> Problem with that would be backwards compatibility, and it's not IMO >> worth breaking everyone's syslog parsing scripts to fix an issue that >> really isn't due to the date format as much as it is to log rotation. > > That is not a showstopper. Nothing prevents to merge both formats in one > daemon and introduce a new syslogd option to choose the desired format. That would be more of a Linux than BSD way of doing things i.e., deprecating the existing format without giving full consideration to the effects on SA scripts and monitoring software, some of which is hardcoded and difficult to change without breaking more than it fixes. The current syslog syntax timestamp has been reliable now for what, 25+ years? I don't personally see any measurable ROI from changing it. YMMV of course. Roger Marquis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120217194851.D76DE1065670>