Re:Log4j 2.15.0 – Previously suggested mitigations may not b...
by jsjohnst on Thursday December 16, 2021 @07:48AM
(#29577597)
> More realistically, this code is 20 years old
Actually, it’s not. Log4j 2 is a ground up rewrite of Log4j and is less than 9 years old from when the rewrite started, 7 years for the GA release. Log4j 1.x isn’t vulnerable as it doesn’t have this “feature”.
Imho, this isn’t a “patches over patches” situation, it’s a very poorly thought out “feature” that almost nobody needed and shouldn’t have been added in the rewrite. The concept of “separation of concerns” exists for a reason. Your logging library should _just_ be concerned with logging.
Actually, it’s not. Log4j 2 is a ground up rewrite of Log4j and is less than 9 years old from when the rewrite started, 7 years for the GA release. Log4j 1.x isn’t vulnerable as it doesn’t have this “feature”.
Imho, this isn’t a “patches over patches” situation, it’s a very poorly thought out “feature” that almost nobody needed and shouldn’t have been added in the rewrite. The concept of “separation of concerns” exists for a reason. Your logging library should _just_ be concerned with logging.