Issue 635: Const declarations missing for audit event types? (sec-rev) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Severity: Summary: Summary: A.9.3 specifies series of System audit events. Should these have declarations in Security.idl or can these be assigned any values. For consistency I am leaning toward the former Resolution: resolved, close issue Revised Text: Actions taken: July 29, 1997: received issue March 26, 1998: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Return-Path: Sender: jis@fpk.hp.com Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 16:41:03 -0400 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Hewlett-Packard New Jersey Labs To: sec-rev@omg.org Cc: Bob Blakley , Belinda Fairthorne Subject: Const declarations missing for audit event types? This is an issue raised by Craig Neuwirt, I thought it is an interesting one: "A.9.3 specifies a series of System audit events in tabular form. These include principal authentication, session authentication, authorization, etc. Should these have const declarations in Security.idl or can these be assigned any values. For consistency, reason I am leaning toward the former." I tend to agree with Craig's leaning and hence believe that we should define constants for each of the audit events in A.9.3. Do the original authors have any comments pro or con? Bob? Belinda? Thanks. Jishnu. -- Email: jis@fpk.hp.com Hewlett-Packard New Jersey Labs Tel: +1 973 443 7528 MS D283, 180 Park Ave., Bldg. 103 Fax: +1 973 443 7602 Florham Park, NJ 07932-9998, USA