LogAnalysis
Re: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 18 2007 04:51PM
Marcus J. Ranum (mjr ranum com) (2 replies)
Re: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 12:59AM
Mordechai T. Abzug (morty frakir org) (2 replies)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 02:07PM
Mike Heisler (mgh4 cornell edu) (2 replies)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 10:00PM
David Corlette (dcorlette novell com)
I'm not sure I agree with this. We all know developers, and what we know about good developers is that they're lazy. So if there's an API or library out there (as there is for XDAS) that can help them solve their logging problem, they'll probably use it to save time. I'd guess that pretty much every Java developer has used Log4J, for example.

There are a couple reasons why they might not use existing standards:
1) The standard doesn't provide easy methods to express all the data they wish to express
2) They have a different target audience than us (assuming we're mostly operations/security/sysadmin types)

A properly designed standard should be able to handle #1, but #2 is much more difficult, as usually the developer is worried about debugging far more than reporting operational or security status or auditing. But I would then argue that the problem is not really at the developer level, it's at the level of the people defining requirements for software products. If the Product Management folks said "This product needs to audit internal operational and security events" then it would get done.

But then there's a third problem:
3) Proprietary software
Most companies have little interest in developing to standards for logging, in fact possibly exactly the opposite if they sell some sort of management interface.

The point being, I think the work that actually needs to be done (because these standards do in fact exist, and although they may be flawed they'd get better if more people used them) is to convince the community (of PM folks and companies) of the value of developing to standards and having interoperability.

>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 10:07 AM, in message <46F27E84.9070007 (at) cornell (dot) edu [email concealed]>,
Mike Heisler <mgh4 (at) cornell (dot) edu [email concealed]> wrote:
> Mordechai T. Abzug wrote:
>>
>> [Cue a bunch of starry-eyed innocents talking up CEE, CEF, and other
>> "standards" that are supposed to make unstructured logs go away Real
>> Soon Now.]
>
> Which is to say, as others have, we need solutions yesterday and
> official standards aren't going to solve the problem.
>
> Log files aren't generally written for us, they are written for the
> programmer or some auditor, individually, in a vacuum for each
> application. If I were to write an application today and wanted to log
> transactions of some sort why would I think to look for standards? Where
> would I start to look? Who cares about my log file any way?

_______________________________________________
LogAnalysis mailing list
LogAnalysis (at) loganalysis (dot) org [email concealed]
http://www.loganalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/loganalysis

[ reply ]
RE: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 07:31PM
Rainer Gerhards (rgerhards hq adiscon com) (1 replies)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 24 2007 10:30PM
Anton Chuvakin (anton chuvakin org) (3 replies)
RE: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 27 2007 04:41PM
Eric Fitzgerald (Eric Fitzgerald microsoft com) (1 replies)
RE: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 27 2007 05:52PM
Marcus J. Ranum (mjr ranum com)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 24 2007 11:24PM
Tom Le (dottom gmail com)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 24 2007 11:03PM
Bill Scherr IV (bschnzl cotse net)
RE: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 06:48AM
Rainer Gerhards (rgerhards hq adiscon com)
Re: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 19 2007 04:58PM
E G (bronc94583 yahoo com) (4 replies)
RE: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 20 2007 11:09AM
Monkman, Brian (bmonkman icsalabs com)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 19 2007 07:16PM
Bill Burge (bill burge com)
Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 19 2007 07:07PM
Jason Lewis (jlewis packetnexus com)
RE: Re: [logs] regexless parsing, again? Sep 19 2007 06:40PM
Tina Bird (tbird precision-guesswork com)


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus