From what I can see after c88f57814c0af0dccf471b895a35981ecdac2e7a - the work
would be
1. Cherry pick or port the CVE fixes from 2.x into that branch. This would be
(according to Martin - thx btw): OPENNLP-1819, 1820, 1821 and 1826 (best case)
2. Fix the transient CVEs (all in brat annotator)
Dependency: com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind
Current: 2.10.1
Issue: Long list of deserialization/DoS CVEs: CVE-2020-25649 (XXE),
CVE-2020-36179/36180/36181/36182 + 2021-20190
(polymorphic
deser gadgets), CVE-2022-42003 / CVE-2022-42004 (DoS)
Fix to: ≥ 2.12.7.1 (min) — better a current 2.18.x
────────────────────────────────────────
Dependency: jackson-core / jackson-annotations
Current: 2.10.1
Issue: Keep in lockstep with databind (BOM)
Fix to: same train as databind
────────────────────────────────────────
Dependency: org.glassfish.jersey.* (common, client, server,
container-grizzly2, media-json-jackson, media-jaxb,
entity-filtering)
Current: 2.30.1
Issue: CVE-2021-28168 — local info disclosure via world‑readable temp file in
jersey-common (affects 2.28–2.33)
Fix to: ≥ 2.34; for Java‑8 safety use 2.35
────────────────────────────────────────
Dependency: org.glassfish.grizzly:grizzly-http-server / -http / -framework
Current: 2.4.4 (2018)
Issue: No single high CVE pinned to 2.4.4, but very stale; HTTP
request-smuggling hardening landed in later 2.4.x. Pulled in
transitively by Jersey
Fix to: comes free when Jersey is bumped (2.35 → grizzly 2.4.4 still; 2.40+
ships newer grizzly)
3. After a release: Talk with ASF Security to alter the published CVEs to
include the new release as fix version (as I guess this effort is mostly driven
by static CVE scanners blaming openlp right now).
4. Decide in OpenNLP if and how many release lines we are willing to handle as
a PMC.
Gruß
Richard
> Am 09.06.2026 um 22:00 schrieb Richard Zowalla <[email protected]>:
>
> As written: I dont mind if we do a release (as long as I am not the person
> doing it).
> Aisde from the back ports, it might also need dependency updates as well
>
>> Am 09.06.2026 um 14:42 schrieb Jeff Zemerick <[email protected]>:
>>
>> Yes, thanks Eric and Suneel - Lucene/Solr 9.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 11:54 AM Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> concur with Eric - it's {Lucene, Solr} - 9x.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> सोम, 8 जून 2026 को 11:19 am बजे को Eric Pugh <
>>> [email protected]> ने लिखा:
>>>
>>>> I think Jeff meant to say Lucene 9 (and Solr 9)!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 8, 2026, at 10:40 AM, Richard Zowalla <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> No, OpenNLP is used in Lucene.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08.06.2026 um 16:29 schrieb Suneel Marthi <[email protected]
>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do we now have a Lucene/Solr dependency in OpenNLP ? or am I reading
>>>>>> this wrong?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> सोम, 8 जून 2026 को 10:26 am बजे को Richard Zowalla <[email protected]>
>>>> ने
>>>>>> लिखा:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This page lists Lucene 8 as EOL: https://endoflife.date/apache-lucene
>>>> <https://endoflife.date/apache-lucene>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And what I found here from SOLR is:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "With Lucene 10 having been released, and therefore Lucene 8 reaching
>>>> EOL,
>>>>>>> the Apache Lucene and Solr PMCs are no longer able to provide new
>>>> releases
>>>>>>> for Solr 8. Solr 8.11.4 will be the last release of Solr 8.“
>>>>>>> Cf. https://solr.apache.org/news.html#solr-8-reaches-end-of-life <
>>>> https://solr.apache.org/news.html#solr-8-reaches-end-of-life>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Couldn’t find any authoritative source from the Lucene PMC regarding
>>>> only
>>>>>>> maintaining 2 release lines, but the Solr posted the above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general: No objections from my side, but the last 8.11.x release of
>>>>>>> Lucene was done 2 years ago - so IMHO there should be a clear release
>>>> plan
>>>>>>> on their side, if we make the extra round-trip...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gruß
>>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 08.06.2026 um 14:43 schrieb Jeff Zemerick <[email protected]
>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> About a month ago we had a few CVEs get addressed. (Thanks to those
>>>>>>>> who took care of them.) Those fixes went into the 2.x branch and for
>>>>>>>> 3.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At least one of those CVEs affects 1.9.x. Normally, I don't think I
>>>>>>>> would worry about it, but in this case, Apache Lucene depends on
>>>>>>>> 1.9.x, and Lucene is still doing releases on that version (8.11),
>>>>>>>> which is used by Solr 8.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What are everyone's thoughts on doing a 1.9.5 release to address, in
>>>>>>>> particular, OPENNLP-1820
>>>>>>>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1820 <
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1820>) and then making a
>>>>>>>> PR to get 1.9.5 into Lucene (and then downstream into Solr)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Disclaimer
>>>>
>>>> The information contained in this communication from the sender is
>>>> confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others
>>>> authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby
>>>> notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in
>>>> relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
>>>> be unlawful.
>>>>
>>>> This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been
>>>> automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber
>>>> resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection,
>>>> security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential
>>>> capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from
>>>> malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the
>>>> movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit
>>>> our website.
>>>>
>
