Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-Cc: radsecpr...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:radsecproxy
Please unblock package radsecproxy
[ Reason ]
Getting the new logcheck rules compatible with new rsyslog format into
Debian Bookworm, preventing a regression on logcheck reporting.
[ Impact ]
logcheck ignore rules will no longer match, creating mails every hour if
logcheck is used, regressing the behavior seen in Debian Bullseye.
[ Tests ]
No automated tests but the packages with the new rules have been running
in production at my employer for the last 4 weeks, working correctly.
[ Risks ]
No risks involved, the core code of the daemon is unchanged from the
1.9.2-1 version, only the logcheck rules have changed.
[ Checklist ]
[X] all changes are documented in the d/changelog
[X] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
[X] attach debdiff against the package in testing
[ Other info ]
unblock radsecproxy/1.9.2-2
diff -Nru radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/changelog radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/changelog
--- radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/changelog 2023-02-16 14:28:15.000000000 +0100
+++ radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/changelog 2023-03-06 16:39:08.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+radsecproxy (1.9.2-2) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ * Improve logcheck patterns to reduce noise
+ * Make logcheck rules compatible with all syslog timestamp formats
+
+ -- Sven Hartge <s...@svenhartge.de> Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:39:08 +0100
+
radsecproxy (1.9.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* New upstream version 1.9.2
diff -Nru radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/logcheck.ignore.server
radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/logcheck.ignore.server
--- radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/logcheck.ignore.server 2023-02-16
14:28:15.000000000 +0100
+++ radsecproxy-1.9.2/debian/logcheck.ignore.server 2023-03-06
16:39:08.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
-^\w{3} [ :[:digit:]]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]:
(Accounting-Response|Access-(Accept|Reject)) for user [@._[:alnum:]-]+
(stationid [.:[:xdigit:]-]+ )?from [._[:alnum:]-]+( \([[:print:]]+\))? to
[._[:alnum:]-]+ \([.:[:xdigit:]]+\)$
-^\w{3} [ :[:digit:]]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]:
Access-Accept \(response to Status-Server\) from [._[:alnum:]-]+ to
[._[:alnum:]-]+ \([.:[:xdigit:]]+\)$
-^\w{3} [ :[:digit:]]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]: replyh:
got status server response from [._[:alnum:]-]+$
+^(\w{3} [ :0-9]{11}|[0-9T:.+-]{32}) [._[:alnum:]-]+
radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]: (Accounting-Response|Access-(Accept|Reject)) for
user [@._[:alnum:]-]+ (stationid [.:[:xdigit:]-]+ )?from [._[:alnum:]-]+(
\([[:print:]]+\))? to [._[:alnum:]-]+ \([.:[:xdigit:]]+\)( operator
[[:print:]]+)?$
+^(\w{3} [ :0-9]{11}|[0-9T:.+-]{32}) [._[:alnum:]-]+
radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]: Access-Accept \(response to Status-Server\) from
[._[:alnum:]-]+ to [._[:alnum:]-]+ \([.:[:xdigit:]]+\)( operator
[._[:alnum:]-]+)?$
+^(\w{3} [ :0-9]{11}|[0-9T:.+-]{32}) [._[:alnum:]-]+
radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]: replyh: got status server response from
[._[:alnum:]-]+$
+^(\w{3} [ :0-9]{11}|[0-9T:.+-]{32}) [._[:alnum:]-]+
radsecproxy\[[[:digit:]]+\]: missing response to Access-Request for user
[@._[:alnum:]-]+ (stationid [.:[:xdigit:]-]+ )?from [._[:alnum:]-]+
\([.:[:xdigit:]]+\) to [._[:alnum:]-]+$
