On 6/9/20 10:35 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
If it is added, it should be appended to the end of the record since it
is an existing record format, then in the case of res=1, errno= should
still be present (not swing in and out) and just contain zero. (Or
another value if there is a non-fatal warning?
On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:15:55 PM EDT Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 2020-06-09 10:00, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > On 6/9/20 9:43 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > > > The number in parenthesis is the error code (such as ENOMEM, EINVAL,
> > > > etc.) IMA uses this format for reporting TPM errors
Hi Richard,
On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 13:15 -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 2020-06-09 10:00, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> If it is added, it should be appended to the end of the record since it
> is an existing record format, then in the case of res=1, errno= should
> still be present (not
On 2020-06-09 10:00, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 6/9/20 9:43 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
>
> > > The number in parenthesis is the error code (such as ENOMEM, EINVAL,
> > > etc.) IMA uses this format for reporting TPM errors in one of the audit
> > > messages (In ima_add_template_entry()). I fol
On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 10:00 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 6/9/20 9:43 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
>
> >> The number in parenthesis is the error code (such as ENOMEM, EINVAL,
> >> etc.) IMA uses this format for reporting TPM errors in one of the audit
> >> messages (In ima_add_template_entr
On Mon, 2020-06-08 at 14:53 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
> condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
> the system log level is raised which would significantly increase
> the messages in the syste
On 6/9/20 9:43 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
The number in parenthesis is the error code (such as ENOMEM, EINVAL,
etc.) IMA uses this format for reporting TPM errors in one of the audit
messages (In ima_add_template_entry()). I followed the same pattern.
Would it be better if the value for "cause" is
Hello,
On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:58:02 AM EDT Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 6/9/20 8:40 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > On Monday, June 8, 2020 5:53:43 PM EDT Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> >> The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
> >> condition is at debug level
On 6/9/20 8:40 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
On Monday, June 8, 2020 5:53:43 PM EDT Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
the system log level is raised which would significan
On Monday, June 8, 2020 5:53:43 PM EDT Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
> condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
> the system log level is raised which would significantly increase
> the messages in the s
On 2020-06-08 14:53, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
> condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
> the system log level is raised which would significantly increase
> the messages in the system log. Change
The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
the system log level is raised which would significantly increase
the messages in the system log. Change this log message to an audit
message for better triaging fai
12 matches
Mail list logo
