[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: SoC: Improve syslogd
Rainer Gerhards schrieb:
One thing, though. I would find it useful if the presence of a file is
not the only permission "indicator". How about the first line being
either "OK", "UNKNOWN" or something else. In case of "OK", the sender
is permitted. In case of "UNKNOWN", this is a yet-unknown fingerprint,
which needs to be authorized by an operator but is not yet permitted
to send to us. This would solve the approval issue that is lingering
behind fingerprint authentication. Anything else would mean "not
You want the syslogd to write new fingerprints into the directory?
I do not think that is a good idea. First it should not be allowed to do
so and have only read access to that directory (or any configuration).
But more important: where is the benefit of having 10 fingerprints with
content "UNKNOWN" there?
From that perspective a textfile with fingerprints would be more
useful, because one can write the hostnames as comments into it.
And if we go a little bit further, there could actually be two value
in the first line (or one each in the first two lines). The permission
state and the usage, e.g. "CLIENT" and "SERVER". In that case,
something flagged as CLIENT could only be used to authenticate a
sender, while a "SERVER" flag means we can authenticate the receiver
when we send.
How does this sound?
To be honest: complicated.
If there is more content than the fingerprint=filename itself, then one
file is usually beter than 1-20 files. And I am still undecided wether
client/server certs are worth the effort. (Not only in implementing but
also in administering as a user.)
Main Index |
Thread Index |