[PATCH] Added checks for 'hard' or '-' for checks in /etc/security/limits.conf
Shawn Wells
shawn at redhat.com
Mon Sep 30 17:14:35 UTC 2013
On 9/30/13 1:09 PM, Frank Caviggia wrote:
> From: Frank Caviggia<fcaviggi at ra.iad.redhat.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Frank Caviggia<fcaviggi at ra.iad.redhat.com>
> ---
> RHEL6/input/checks/accounts_max_concurrent_login_sessions.xml | 2 +-
> RHEL6/input/checks/disable_users_coredumps.xml | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/RHEL6/input/checks/accounts_max_concurrent_login_sessions.xml b/RHEL6/input/checks/accounts_max_concurrent_login_sessions.xml
> index cb2e859..a3658ff 100644
> --- a/RHEL6/input/checks/accounts_max_concurrent_login_sessions.xml
> +++ b/RHEL6/input/checks/accounts_max_concurrent_login_sessions.xml
> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
>
> <ind:textfilecontent54_object id="object_etc_security_limits_conf_maxlogins" version="1">
> <ind:filepath>/etc/security/limits.conf</ind:filepath>
> - <ind:pattern operation="pattern match">^[\s]*\*[\s]+hard[\s]+maxlogins[\s]+(\d+)\s*$</ind:pattern>
> + <ind:pattern operation="pattern match">^[\s]*\*[\s]+(hard|-)[\s]+maxlogins[\s]+(\d+)\s*$</ind:pattern>
> <ind:instance datatype="int">1</ind:instance>
> </ind:textfilecontent54_object>
>
> diff --git a/RHEL6/input/checks/disable_users_coredumps.xml b/RHEL6/input/checks/disable_users_coredumps.xml
> index d8491cd..ad217a7 100644
> --- a/RHEL6/input/checks/disable_users_coredumps.xml
> +++ b/RHEL6/input/checks/disable_users_coredumps.xml
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
> </criteria>
> </definition>
> <ind:textfilecontent54_test check="all"
> - comment="Tests the value of the ^[\s]*\*[\s]+hard[\s]+core[\s]+([\d]+) setting in the /etc/security/limits.conf file"
> + comment="Tests the value of the ^[\s]*\*[\s]+(hard|-)[\s]+core[\s]+([\d]+) setting in the /etc/security/limits.conf file"
> id="test_core_dumps_limitsconf" version="1">
> <ind:object object_ref="object_core_dumps_limitsconf" />
> <ind:state state_ref="state_core_dumps_limitsconf" />
> -- 1.8.3.1
Ack! Tested locally w/testcheck -- good call w/ensuring we support both
methods!
More information about the scap-security-guide
mailing list