LC Bruzenak <lenny magitekltd com>
On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 15:50 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
>> On Friday 31 October 2008 14:21:12 David Flatley wrote:
>> Perhaps we need the capability of switching out partitions used for logging?
>> Maybe that could be solved by using the space left action exec capability to
>> run a custom program that re-writes the audit config file or changes a
>> symlink to point to another config file to point to a new dir and then sends
>> sighup to the parent (auditd).
>> Maybe some others have ideas about how they solve the same problem. If we need
>> to make changes to the audit daemon to make this smoother, let me know what's
>David, I will have similar requirements and I've been thinking about
>this also. Not sure about you, but my audit data has the following
>requirements (and others):
>* archive to off-site storage
>* restore from archive
>* search capabilities (mostly covered in ausearch and audit-viewer)
>* robust (cannot lose any data received)
Yes my requirements are very similar.
>Like you, I'm planning a periodic shift. This enables straightforward
>time-based restore/search for humans. Ideally, it would be totally
>automated, as in:
>1: shift auditing to a new R/W partition each month.
>2: Make the previous month audit data RO.
>3: archive the previous month to tape/DVD
>4: put the RO partition back into the "available" queue
>5: ensure the current audit is also mirrored over to a big storage area
>with all the past data on it.
>6: Send an email to the administrator that all the above has
>Steve, as my testing progresses I'll add comments in this area. I had
>thought a cron-activated logrotate on the month would cover this, but it
>means 2 admin areas; if there is a way to do it inside the audit
>structure, that would be preferable to me. It would simplify/consolidate
>the config rpm(s) I create. Anything you could do to help facilitate a
>scheme as described above would be welcome.
>David, a couple of questions for you:
>* Have you looked at the audit-viewer, and do you intend to use this?
No, have not looked at it, really would like to use Tivoli compliance insight manager.
>* I assume "heavy usage systems" means lots of audit data...are your
>rules tuned appropriately? This is critical for me - one over-zealous
>rule will add a flood of unhelpful info.
Yes I am in the process of evaluating rules, using S.T.I.G. recommendations.
>* You mention "balancing performance" - are you talking about
>per-machine or network (via aggregation)?
Yes per machine, network is not an issue.
>When reading your post I
>assumed aggregation from my own perspective but you didn't actually
>specify so I thought maybe I should ask. I'm aggregating all audit from
>several machines to a single audit machine for
I remove the logs daily per machine and store them per system.
LC (Lenny) Bruzenak
lenny magitekltd com
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit redhat com