Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Audit Log #289

Closed
widhalmt opened this issue Mar 12, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

Audit Log #289

widhalmt opened this issue Mar 12, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or improvement
Milestone

Comments

@widhalmt
Copy link
Member

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

We need a way to track who is changing what in Business Processes via webinterface. We can make sure that users don't have access to the configuration files or database information but right now we can't track user activity for web users.

It would be great to have this functionality integrated with a global audit log of Icinga Web 2 where other modules could hook on, too.

Describe the solution you'd like

I'd like to have information about changes in the Business Process configuration to be tracked via Icinga Web 2 audit log.

A separate log file would be fine but a combined approach would be much more useful.

At least username, object name, type of change and timestamp should be included.

Describe alternatives you've considered

None.

Additional context

ref/NC/702008

dgoetz added a commit to dgoetz/icingaweb2-module-businessprocess that referenced this issue Mar 31, 2021
@dgoetz
Copy link
Contributor

dgoetz commented Mar 31, 2021

I added a PR which would be a solution or at least a start of.
An example screenshot can be found there.

@nilmerg nilmerg added this to the 2.4.0 milestone Mar 31, 2021
@nilmerg nilmerg added the enhancement New feature or improvement label Mar 31, 2021
@nilmerg
Copy link
Member

nilmerg commented Apr 20, 2021

Is this then done with #290? Or are there more detailed actions such as node changes wanted? Though, not sure whether we should add those, as this is more of a version history for bps then. 🤔

@widhalmt
Copy link
Member Author

widhalmt commented May 5, 2021

I'd say, yes. That's enough for a start. If someone needs more features, that would be another issue if you ask me.

@nilmerg
Copy link
Member

nilmerg commented May 5, 2021

Okay, I'll close here then.

@nilmerg nilmerg closed this as completed May 5, 2021
yhabteab pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 25, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants