I already check the success of authorization, failure and logout.
I reviewed the audit (logging) of each method call and saved a version of each row and column that has ever been modified, but both of these options significantly increase the complexity of the audit. Auditing a random subset is too random.
Legal specifications (FISMA, C & A) just say that something needs to be checked.
Are there any other non-domain audit strategies that I forget?
, , , , -/- ..
, . " " .
- , , ... , , .... , , , , .
, -, , . ( ).
. - , , , " 2938". , , . , , - , "Dave deleted..." - , -
.
, , , . sql, ( , SQL Server). , , , . (dba backup) prod, , , , , . . , dbas , , - , .
, . , . , , . , , , - , .
, , , , .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1709179/More articles:Configuring namespace reservation in Windows XP 64 bit - windows-xpTimestamp response is incorrect - BouncyCastle - javaПерекрытие краской combobox с использованием WndProc - vb.netThe fastest way to create a hash SQL DB DB schema script - sqlSimulate a keystroke in an invisible object in a C # web browser - htmlSQL Only consider the values indicated in each column - sqlRegistration for expired timer events - c #Flex / Flash: how to embed the same font in multiple SWC - flexLoading a 32-bit process in a 64-bit environment - javascriptHow to create a delete command for a Windows-based application in the application folder - vb.netAll Articles