Log4j 1 is only affected if you have a "special" logging config with custom 
appenders that explicitely enable this feature. If anybody does this, heshe 
wants it. 

Uwe

-----
Uwe Schindler
Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
https://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: [email protected]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Gerlowski <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 7:16 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> 
> Does anyone know whether ZooKeeper is affected at all?  I checked
> their mailing list archive this morning to see if there was any
> discussion of the issue, but didn't see anything either way.
> 
> I would guess they're unaffected - the CVE seems specific to log4j2
> and ZK appears to still be on log4j-1.2.17.  But I figured it was
> worth checking here in case anyone knew more definitively.
> 
> Jason
> 
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 12:33 PM Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Log4j 2.15.0 defaults to this setting enabled. This was not the case since 
> > the
> 2nd release candidate this moring and the final log4j release.
> >
> >
> >
> > No log4j 2.15 had this system property removed, so it does nothing anymore.
> The problem with first fix was that there were still other ways to exploit 
> this
> (not LDAP something else). So the decision by log4j team was to disable any
> expansions in logging messages. You need to enable them in your loggin
> patterns config file explicitly.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike already released a statement in the security section on web page. We
> should send an information on mailing list, too.
> >
> >
> >
> > I am tweeting this, too.
> >
> >
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> >
> > Uwe Schindler
> >
> > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> >
> > https://www.thetaphi.de
> >
> > eMail: [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Cassandra Targett <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 5:13 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> >
> >
> >
> > Uwe, I understand Log4J 2.15.0 is going to address the vulnerability, but do
> you think we should add the system property
> 'log4j2.formatMsgNoLookups=true' anyway, just as a general good practice? I
> got that impression from reading your earlier message and wanted to confirm
> if I was correct.
> >
> > Even though we don’t need a CVE, I think we should proactively a) add a news
> item to the security.html page with the simple mitigation; and b) post the 
> same
> to the solr-user list. I could tackle these if there are no objections.
> >
> > Cassandra
> >
> > On Dec 10, 2021, 7:44 AM -0600, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]>, wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > there was a message by the ASF security team to the members list: All
> projects should upgrade, but a CVE for each project is NOT needed:
> >
> >
> >
> > “Note: any updates of ASF projects needed to address this should reference
> CVE-2021-44228 and do not require a project-specific CVE.”
> >
> >
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> >
> > Uwe Schindler
> >
> > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> >
> > https://www.thetaphi.de
> >
> > eMail: [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Gus Heck <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 1:32 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> >
> >
> >
> > In progress already it seems https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-
> 15843
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 7:29 AM Gus Heck <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > i think upgrade is a preferable solution lest we field repeated emails/jiras
> about vulnerability scanners detecting it.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > With log4j 2.15.0 this should be fixed and by default all expansions on log
> messages were disabled: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3198
> >
> > -----
> > Uwe Schindler
> > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> > https://www.thetaphi.de
> > eMail: [email protected]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Uwe Schindler <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 11:10 AM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Subject: RE: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> > >
> > > In general the sysprop "log4j2.formatMsgNoLookups=true" fix is the only
> > > correct fix (maybe add it to the bootstrap class of solr). Updating log4j 
> > > is
> not
> > > really needed. This prevents any of those shit. There's no reason ever to
> parse
> > > ${} escapes in log messages. The only place where this can be used is the
> > > format pattern in the config file, but WTF was the idea behind that to 
> > > pass
> ALL
> > > log messages through the expansion?
> > >
> > > Man man, SNEAKY log4j!!! 😊
> > >
> > > Uwe
> > >
> > > -----
> > > Uwe Schindler
> > > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> > > https://www.thetaphi.de
> > > eMail: [email protected]
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Uwe Schindler <[email protected]>
> > > > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 10:35 AM
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: RE: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I did some checks:
> > > > - The problem also exists with logging parameters, so it is also 
> > > > executed if
> you
> > > > call (which is IMHO a design failure in log4j, the reason for this is 
> > > > that the
> > > > expansion is happending on printing the complete formatted log string to
> the
> > > > output file): logger.info("Foobar: {}", "${badPayload}")
> > > > - It also triggers if the message of an exception has a malicous 
> > > > payload! So
> > > > happens easily if some input is validated and there's an
> > > > IllegalArgumentException logged on validation errors
> > > >
> > > > To try out, and see it live do the following (can be done on any 
> > > > server, I
> tested
> > > > it on my own servers, worked always):
> > > >
> > > > Start a local netcat:
> > > > root@pangaea-mw1:~# nc -lp 1234
> > > >
> > > > Go to any user interface of you application, e.g. solr or send a query
> > > containing
> > > > this payload, e.g. as part of a query string that is logged:
> > > > ${jndi:ldap://127.0.0.1:1234/abc}
> > > >
> > > > You will see cryptic text with emojis in the above netcat output. This
> shows
> > > > that it definitely made an external request.
> > > >
> > > > We should fix this in 8.11 by doing the following:
> > > > a) add "-Dlog4j2.formatMsgNoLookups=true" to Solr's start scripts (easy
> fix, I
> > > > did the same on all my servers). Add this to the *main shell script*, 
> > > > not to
> the
> > > > solr.sh.in files, as those are modified by users.
> > > > b) possibly update log4j, but with above fix it's not urgent and should 
> > > > not
> be
> > > > done in 10.0.
> > > >
> > > > Uwe
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > Uwe Schindler
> > > > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> > > > https://www.thetaphi.de
> > > > eMail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Bram Van Dam <[email protected]>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2021 8:31 AM
> > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > > Subject: Log4J RCE vulnerability
> > > > >
> > > > > Heads up:
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems like there's a pretty severe remote code execution vulnerability
> > > > > [1] in Log4J. Basically any application that uses log4j and that 
> > > > > allows
> > > > > user input to be injected into a logging string is susceptible. This
> > > > > probably includes Solr.
> > > > >
> > > > > Further interesting discussion on Hacker News [2]
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://www.lunasec.io/docs/blog/log4j-zero-day/
> > > > > [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29504755
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Bram
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> >
> > http://www.the111shift.com (play)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> >
> > http://www.the111shift.com (play)
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to