Hello Martijn,

I found the following posting, that version 1.x may be affected,too, but in a 
different way (only LDAP based?):

https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608#issuecomment-991723301

Since the Pro version supports LDAP certificat lookups, could this be a problem?

Best wishes,

Stefan

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Martijn Brinkers via Users <[email protected]>
> Gesendet: Montag 13. Dezember 2021 8:34
> An: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]; Martijn Brinkers <[email protected]>
> Betreff: [CipherMail User] Re: Apache log4j vulnerability, CVE-2021-44228
> 
> Hi Ricky,
> 
> CipherMail Gateway and Webmail Messenger are *not* vulnerable to 
> CVE-2021-44228 because an older version of log4j (1.2) is used which
> does not contain the (vulnerable) lookup functionality. 
> 
> When we became aware, a few hours after the details were posted, that
> log4j was exploitable, we analyzed the exploit and concluded that
> CipherMail was not vulnerable.
> 
> CipherMail uses version 1.2.15 of the log4j library. This version is
> still widely deployed. It is true that version 1.x of log4j is no
> longer supported, however we always analyze any impact of a published
> exploit to see whether a CipherMail product is impacted or not. We are
> not aware of any vulnerabilities in the default configuration of 1.x as
> used by CipherMail.
> 
> We will further analyze whether we upgrade to a newer version of log4j
> or use a different logging library instead.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Martijn Brinkers
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2021-12-13 at 02:42 +0000, ricky.boone--- via Users wrote:
> > Apache log4j has a critical zero day vulnerability (CVSS score of
> > 10), CVE-2021-44228.
> > 
> > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/security.html
> > https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-44228
> > https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/apache-log4j-vulnerability-cve-2021-44228/
> > 
> > The vulnerability appears to impact log4j 2.x thru 2.15.0-rc1.  Upon
> > a cursory check, Ciphermail appears to use log4j 1.2.15, which while
> > end of life and potentially vulnerable to other threats, shouldn't be
> > vulnerable to this specific flaw.  As a result, the mitigating
> > controls may not be applicable or necessary.
> > 
> > Thoughts, or discussion?
> -- 
> CipherMail email encryption
> Email encryption with support for S/MIME,
> OpenPGP, PDF Messenger and Webmail Messenger
> 
> 

Reply via email to