Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 27 May 2007 18:30:56 +0200
From:      Benjamin Lutz <mail@maxlor.com>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, karma@freebsd.org
Cc:        trustedbsd-discuss@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: SoC: Distributed Audit Daemon project
Message-ID:  <200705271830.59646.mail@maxlor.com>
In-Reply-To: <200705261149.18510.karma@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <200705250322.22259.karma@FreeBSD.org> <200705252004.38092.mail@maxlor.com> <200705261149.18510.karma@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1297929.ZEhfnqmqU5
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Saturday 26 May 2007 09:49, Alexey Mikhailov wrote:
> On Friday 25 May 2007 22:04:34 Benjamin Lutz wrote:
> > On Friday 25 May 2007 01:22:21 Alexey Mikhailov wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > 2. As I said before initial subject of this project was
> > > "Distributed audit daemon". But after some discussions we had
> > > decided that this project can be done in more general maner. We
> > > can perform distributed logging for any user-space app.
> > > [...]
> >
> > This sounds very similar to syslogd. Is it feasible to make dlogd a
> > drop-in replacement for syslogd, at least from a
> > syslog-using-program point of view?
>
> Our project concentrates on log shipping. We're paying most attention
> to securely and reliable log ships. So our project differs from
> syslogd in major way.
>
> But actually it could be possible to be dlogd used by
> syslogd\syslog-ng for logs shipping, as I see it.

The thing that bugs me most about syslog is not even the transport to=20
remote syslogd instances; that's relatively easy to fix (put some SSL=20
between the daemons, or use encrypted tunnels, etc). It's that when a=20
process logs a syslog event, it can claim to be anything at all. Iirc,=20
it can even give a bogus timestamp.

So what I was hoping for here is for auditd to come with a hook that=20
intercepts syslog(3) calls, adds/validates pid, process name and=20
timestamp, and then puts that information somewhere (some local log, a=20
remote log, a lineprinter). It doesn't even have to give the=20
information back to a syslogd daemon; whatever auditd uses for itself=20
would be fine too.

What I'm hoping for here is some way to get a guarantee that the=20
information in a log is actually correct. The way it is at the moment,=20
syslog messages are way too trivial to spoof. Anyway, this is just a=20
feature wish :) I'm happy to see you work on auditd, whether or not it=20
contains these syslog bits.

Cheers
Benjamin


--nextPart1297929.ZEhfnqmqU5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBGWbJDzZEjpyKHuQwRAq2iAJoD1nhQu/O3Ot8QAs2JLAf4vDsrVACcC9tG
KXQ5a+jxxnoL+HBNQ/WtEns=
=A7tz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1297929.ZEhfnqmqU5--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200705271830.59646.mail>