* Steven Siebert (smsiebe@gmail.com) wrote:
> There are currently three suggestions on a fix put forth already:
> 1) remove the raw line from the log entirely, just keeping the line numb=
er
> 2) log that one specific event containing the raw log at a lower log
> level (ie debug)
> 3) parse out the password and continue to log the sanitized line at
> the same "level" (all)
>=20
> I'm OK with the fact that the patch I provided using the first
> approach seems to be denied. Can we consider either approach 2, 3, or
> perhaps a combination or 2/3?
I actually don't really see a huge problem with 1, but I need to go
review the thread in more detail...
> I do have alternative means at my disposal (ie use flume, or something
> similar, to filter out just the log events I'm interested in and
> forward off)...but we wanted to be able to help those behind us that
> had similar concerns by fixing it at the source of the 'problem'. I
> want postgres to be unequivocally be approved software for the
> government - not conditionally based on complex usages of 3rd party
> applications to get it into an approved state.
Yeah, I tend to agree- mistakes and errors are different considerations
when it comes to auditing, etc.
Thanks,
Stephen