Re: filling my logs after upgrade to woody

2002-06-08 Thread Bill Wohler
Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jun  8 21:00:01 harvey PAM_unix[10392]: (cron) session closed for user root
> 
> This is really annoying when I'm checking the logs.  I've had a look for the 
> problem, but came up emtpy.

  Not a problem, just PAM reporting setuid calls.

--
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and mh-e. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: filling my logs after upgrade to woody

2002-06-08 Thread Keith Robinson
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:42:28PM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
 > Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 > > Jun  8 21:00:01 harvey PAM_unix[10392]: (cron) session closed for user root
 > > 
 > > This is really annoying when I'm checking the logs.  I've had a look for 
 > > the problem, but came up emtpy.
 > 
 >   Not a problem, just PAM reporting setuid calls.
 > 

 Cheers for the response.  Any way of redirecting this output to a different 
log, or is it just something that I'll have to work around when surveying the 
logs?

Keith


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: filling my logs after upgrade to woody

2002-06-09 Thread Bill Wohler
Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:42:28PM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
>  > Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>  > > Jun  8 21:00:01 harvey PAM_unix[10392]: (cron) session closed for user 
> root
>  > > 
>  > > This is really annoying when I'm checking the logs.  I've had a look for 
> the problem, but came up emtpy.
>  > 
>  >   Not a problem, just PAM reporting setuid calls.
>  > 
> 
>  Cheers for the response.  Any way of redirecting this output to a different 
> log, or is it just something that I'll have to work around when surveying the 
> logs?

  The answer is most likely yes, although I'd have to dig through the
  syslog and PAM man pages to find the spells to throw into the witches'
  pot, namely syslog.conf.

  However, you probably really don't want to do that. That information
  might be useful in the case of a security breach. As you mention,
  ignoring the messages until you do need them is a reasonable approach.
  Indeed, this is what I do in my logcheck filters.

--
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and mh-e. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: filling my logs after upgrade to woody

2002-06-17 Thread Keith Robinson
On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 02:51:02PM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
 > Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 > > On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 01:42:28PM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
 > >  > Keith Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 > >  > > Jun  8 21:00:01 harvey PAM_unix[10392]: (cron) session closed for 
 > > user root
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > This is really annoying when I'm checking the logs.  I've had a look 
 > > for the problem, but came up emtpy.
 > >  > 
 > >  >   Not a problem, just PAM reporting setuid calls.
 > >  > 
 > > 
 > >  Cheers for the response.  Any way of redirecting this output to a 
 > > different log, or is it just something that I'll have to work around when 
 > > surveying the logs?
 > 
 >   The answer is most likely yes, although I'd have to dig through the
 >   syslog and PAM man pages to find the spells to throw into the witches'
 >   pot, namely syslog.conf.
 > 
 >   However, you probably really don't want to do that. That information
 >   might be useful in the case of a security breach. As you mention,
 >   ignoring the messages until you do need them is a reasonable approach.
 >   Indeed, this is what I do in my logcheck filters.
 > 

 Yes, I think this is probably the best response.  It had crossed my mind to 
filter the logs with a small perl script, but, as you say, this information 
won't then be available to me should I need to refer to it.  So I'll just read 
around it.

Thanks for your responses, Bill.  Most appreciated.

Keith


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]