|
I'm looking at the use of the audit journal to detect changes in objects, esp. IFS. From looking at the Security Reference, it seems I need to CHGAUD on all the objects I want to monitor, and, for our purposes, that means just about everything. I intend to exclude as much as I can - things like /QIBM/ProdData/*, "include" directories, remotes, symbolic links, etc. I've been told that this approach is in use by some of the high availability folk. The manual does say that auditing EVERYthing can hurt performance. But we're not doing everything, and only changes, not use. Since the check for whether to audit is done every time an object is touched, anyway, right, the cost comes when writing to the journal. And since this is for change only, not use (read), is the hit acceptable? Other issues raise their ugly heads - coexistence with other products using the audit journal, management (for our purposes we don't NEED a long audit trail), but that's a whole 'nuther story. Thanks Vern
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.