Is there a reason you haven’t provided a pull request for this in the
Apache NetBeans GitHub repo?

Gj



On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 19:44, Dill, Ryan <cd...@ciena.com.invalid> wrote:

> The latest version of Apache NetBeans (19) still distributes Apache Struts
> 1:
>
>
>
>    -
>    
> https://github.com/apache/netbeans/blob/3d20321140ae0c530955b54f1812b1ad883ae15a/enterprise/web.struts/nbproject/project.properties#L58
>
>
>
> Apache Struts 1 was EOLed a decade ago:
>
>
>
>    - https://struts.apache.org/struts1eol-announcement.html
>    - https://struts.apache.org/struts1eol-press
>
>
>
> Hence, any subsequent bugs or security vulnerabilities found in Struts 1
> since that time would not have been fixed in the version of Struts
> distributed with modern versions of Apache NetBeans.
>
>
>
> I don't know if the continued distribution of Struts 1 with NetBeans
> constitutes an actual vulnerability in *NetBeans* (since I assume the
> Struts framework is only provided for users to develop new web
> applications) -- But the simple presence of the Struts 1 library files in
> NetBeans installations causes security flags to be raised by third-party
> security scanning tools that our corporation is using, like Rapid 7 (
> https://www.rapid7.com/).
>
>
>
> At the very least, continuing to distribute Struts 1 with NetBeans seems
> to introduce risk that end-users using NetBeans to develop web applications
> with Struts (e.g. as per
> https://netbeans.apache.org/kb/docs/web/quickstart-webapps-struts.html)
> may end up producing a web application with Struts 1 without necessarily
> know it's EOL, creating more risk in their web application than necessary.
>
>
>
> Is there a reason that NetBeans is still distributing long-EOLed Struts 1
> instead of something more modern (e.g. Struts 2.5.x, or even Struts 6.x)?
>
>
>
> --
> Ryan Dill (he/him) | R&D Tools and Services | Ciena
>
> cd...@ciena.com | 5050 Innovation Drive | Kanata, ON, K2K 0J2, Canada
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/5050+Innovation+Drive+%7C+Kanata,+ON,+K2K+0J2,+Canada?entry=gmail&source=g>
>
>
>

Reply via email to