Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> writes: > I don't think shishid would ever syslog any passwords. So maybe we > should use LOG_AUTH instead, then? I wonder why LOG_AUTH was marked > deprecated in my man page...
I don't know why the Linux manpages project marks LOG_AUTH in general as deprecated. I know that LOG_AUTH on Linux is not configured with restricted access normally, whereas LOG_AUTHPRIV is, but I would still tend to log authentication subsystems (that don't require special permissions) to LOG_AUTH instead of using something generic like LOG_USER. Although I suppose from the perspective of the local system the KDC is just another user process, not part of the authentication infrastructure for that particular system. The GNU C Library manual doesn't document LOG_AUTHPRIV at all and just has LOG_AUTH, so the Linux manpages aren't getting it from there. POSIX itself only standardizes LOG_USER and the LOG_LOCALn priorities and says nothing about any of the other possibilities. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Help-shishi mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-shishi
