You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In certain conditions it would be useful to have enforced logging available. Especially in cases where logs are required for compliance, having upterm record the session and export logs would be extremely useful.
This would also position upterm to fulfil a role similar to what sudo_pair does. It lacks the "approve" feature, but engineers who are performing sensitive actions have both another engineer reviewing actions during the session, and exported logs for future audit requirements.
Expected behaviour
There are multiple options here, but the first requirement would be that the session is started in "compliance" mode. This would be through a flag --compliance. The user could also specify a log file location.
One option with the log file generation is to only generate the log file on the host side. Alternatively a client that connects to a host that has --compliance enabled would also start recording logs. The benefit here is that there are two records of the logs and you remove the single party responsibility.
Actual logging can be added to the stdin, stdout and stderr of the session. This would need to be added to the session.stdin etc, maybe an io.Pipe that does session.stdin --> logger-pipe --> ptx.stdin
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi @staaldraad, I totally agree. This would be a very useful feature. Just wondering if you have a workaround, something like using asciinema or script to achieve this?
In certain conditions it would be useful to have enforced logging available. Especially in cases where logs are required for compliance, having
upterm
record the session and export logs would be extremely useful.This would also position upterm to fulfil a role similar to what sudo_pair does. It lacks the "approve" feature, but engineers who are performing sensitive actions have both another engineer reviewing actions during the session, and exported logs for future audit requirements.
Expected behaviour
There are multiple options here, but the first requirement would be that the session is started in "compliance" mode. This would be through a flag
--compliance
. The user could also specify a log file location.One option with the log file generation is to only generate the log file on the
host
side. Alternatively a client that connects to a host that has--compliance
enabled would also start recording logs. The benefit here is that there are two records of the logs and you remove the single party responsibility.Actual logging can be added to the stdin, stdout and stderr of the session. This would need to be added to the
session.stdin
etc, maybe anio.Pipe
that doessession.stdin --> logger-pipe --> ptx.stdin
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: