RE: open source artificial ignorance-like systems
"Joe_Wulf" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.sysutils.loganalysis |
|---|---|
| Organization | Home/Personal |
| Message-ID | <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAI0mbVq38OtHvIfYWTLmtk3CgAAAEAAAALHwGbi3KZlGvOlSGRIh4I4BAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> |
I'd like to offer another perspective.......... what about a 'dictionary'? All the OS's have 'some' elements of commonality. Each OS vender has common areas. Create an analysis of log information that is common and stabilize its 'format', even to the 'bit' level where applicable, and document it. That is then standard parse able. R, -Joe Wulf, CISSP, USN (RET) ProSync Technology Group, LLC ProSync www.prosync.com Senior IA Engineer -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Safier, Adam * Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 21:26 To: Marcus J. Ranum; [email protected] Subject: RE: [logs] open source artificial ignorance-like systems What I was thinking was that the AI language rules would parse the log records into a common storage format. A database would be hard to modify for every new definition but many components are the same - date, time, #, string message. Maybe moving to something like XML where you could add definitions would work, though I don't know how you would store large data volumes. Probably a combination of tools would be necessary: simple ignore rules to knock down the easy 80%+, then convert to XML so every component of the log line gets a label or gets kicked out to the rule maintainers, then check alarm rules and do event correlation on all the items that now have nice labels. It's been way too long since I touched code, so I'm not going to think about performance. Adam - sliding back into lurk mode. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marcus J. Ranum Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 8:30 PM To: Safier, Adam *; [email protected] Subject: RE: [logs] open source artificial ignorance-like systems Safier, Adam * wrote: >I have to wonder if anyone has approached the Artificial Intelligence >crowd with log analysis questions like this. It seems this would be >right up their alley. I would think that LISP might be decent at >processing something like a log file, though I admit I don't know >enough to know which AI tree to bark up. The problem is that logs are really a form of communication - which means they're a language problem. AI can do some interesting things with language but having a grammar (even approximate) for the language is critical. UNfortunately for us log analysts there isn't anything like an actual logging language. There's a vocabulary, but the vocabulary isn't used consistently. :( I.e.: what happens when you have a host named "root"? You find that any word in the log vocabularly can mean anything, which means that they all mean nothing. mjr. _______________________________________________ LogAnalysis mailing list [email protected] http://www.loganalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/loganalysis _______________________________________________ LogAnalysis mailing list [email protected] http://www.loganalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/loganalysis