Am Freitag, 26. September 2014, 19:08:13 schrieb Ric Moore: > On 09/26/2014 05:08 PM, green wrote: > > Ric Moore wrote at 2014-09-26 14:18 -0500: > >> Change is certainly needed when any pimple face kid can edit and hide his > >> doings from a text log with nano. I think the change is necessary to > >> harden > >> up our systems. Otherwise, Microsoft will become the only secure server > >> OS, > >> as they don't mind hiding things at all. > > > > So, all other things being equal, binary logs are more secure than > > plain text logs. Is that actually what you are saying? > > Yes. The benefit of using a binary log is the lesser vulnerability to an > external attack from an intruder. That huge security flaw was mentioned > on a recent PBS video regarding the new day Hackers and how simply they > removed/edited text-log files to hide their tracks of what they did.
I think I read on uselessd site, that rsyslog has a signing feature meanwhile. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/17453900.1PNaJrGDDq@merkaba
