Nice!! I like it. I'll standby for what you've submitted, and check it
out.
Red Hat Consulting
Michael J. McConachie, RHCE
Consultant - Red Hat, Inc.
michael(a)redhat.com
[m] 760-819-2111
On 09/06/2012 01:21 PM, Jeffrey Blank wrote:
I think I've figured a way forward with macros, and also for how
to
handle the manual check content.
I propose that we position the manual check content for processing as
OCIL, and stored it in-line with the XCCDF (following the description,
which we are using to store the configuration/rememdiation actions).
The next patches from me will demonstrate (and also allow for viewing of
proposed check content).
It doesn't make legitimate OCIL at all yet -- it's just positioned to
become OCIL (so forgive my made-up <ocil> tag for now.) But the later
adjustment should be transparent to content authors anyway.
On 09/06/2012 12:56 PM, Michael J. McConachie wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> Thanks for the confirmation. I agree about the macro idea -- I ran that
> by my folks here as well, and I was told that for the time being we'll
> shelve it, and move forward. I'm glad that I'm not the only one that
> sees it that way.
>
> As for me, what I thought of doing was matching what OVAL is actually
> doing at the OS level for its checks, and align it with the description
> text that the user will see. As you already know, so many people (in
> the arenas who'll use this product) may/may not trust the check scripts,
> and they may want to do their own checks.
>
> Will commit per this reply of yours.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike
>
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list
scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide