Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 1 Feb 2006 19:40:44 -0500
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com>
Cc:        trustedbsd-audit@TrustedBSD.org, K?vesd?n G?bor <gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: HEADS UP: Audit integration into CVS in progress, some tree disruption
Message-ID:  <20060202004044.GA99245@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <43E14C53.3060400@rogers.com>
References:  <20060201221213.L87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E134AB.8000600@t-hosting.hu> <20060201222704.G87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E14C53.3060400@rogers.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:03:31PM -0500, Mike Jakubik wrote:
> Robert Watson wrote:
> >
> >On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, K?vesd?n G?bor wrote:
> >
> >>Do you plan to merge it to RELENG_6? If so, when? Maybe for the=20
> >>upcoming 6.1? Or only for 6.2 or later?
> >
> >It depends a bit how well this shakes out.  The code is definitely=20
> >still "experimental", in that the set of events audited is not yet=20
> >complete.  There are three general sorts of weaknesses in the set of=20
> >events currently audited:
> >With all this in mind, it is not yet ruled out that we could ship=20
> >initial "experimental" audit support in 6.1-RELEASE.  In fact, the=20
> >timing is currently such that it will be possible, assuming all goes=20
> >well, and allowing for the fact that it really will be an experimental=
=20
> >feature and not production feature in 6.1.  We were quite careful to=20
> >merge the necessary ABI changes to RELENG_6 before the 6.0 release so=20
> >that merging it would be possible without breaking existing 6.x device=
=20
> >drivers.
>=20
> Personally, i would like to see less "experimental" code in 6.1. Perhaps=
=20
> it would be better to wait until everyone feels the code is ready?

Why do you care if code that is not enabled by default is present in
the system? :-)

Kris

--YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFD4VULWry0BWjoQKURAhmKAJ4lFtHq7Nlc5tS7IVMwPJAgJd6RMwCg2BhW
xMxXan43EQKxELJCkNOrZZM=
=/6IH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060202004044.GA99245>