Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 29 Dec 2006 23:38:48 -0600
From:      "Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T" <jeffh@dundeemt.com>
To:        "Dan Nelson" <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, eik@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: baseaudit?
Message-ID:  <5aaed53f0612292138w5fac4339pb8617a9dae7570bd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061230045727.GB83619@dan.emsphone.com>
References:  <5aaed53f0612291952o2dbcb08qba1bbf6f6f4f33f8@mail.gmail.com> <20061230045727.GB83619@dan.emsphone.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 12/29/06, Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> wrote:
> In the last episode (Dec 29), Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T said:
> > Is there an a sibling to portaudit that monitors your base ?
>
> Subscribing to the freebsd-security-notifications list (very low
> traffic), or periodically checking http://security.freebsd.org/ is
> about it.
>
That's too bad.  I monitor those -- but it never hurts to have a
secondary channel. ( What I would like a bunch is a way to wire
portaudit and the theoretical baseaudit in to nagios, but that is a
different issue)  I could probably hack a baseaudit up with vuln.xml
and uname -r  but I wonder what size task it would be to add an option
to portaudit?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5aaed53f0612292138w5fac4339pb8617a9dae7570bd>