4 ms·
I reckon the scale is simply not linear. The likes of FAANG or banks, they have a big target painted on their backs; so they are scrambling for cover. However,
by toyg 5y ago
I reckon the scale is simply not linear.
The likes of FAANG or banks, they have a big target painted on their backs; so they are scrambling for cover. However, the overwhelming majority of other businesses are not under similar pressure, because it's unlikely they will be targeted first - if at all.
I was actually talking about this with a friend who works for a company that provides a few niche services. They've had log4j 1.x in production for eons, which is also vulnerable to bad remote exploits, and nothing ever happened - simply because hackers are extremely unlikely to target their services. Obviously it doesn't mean they shouldn't upgrade, but the pressure is basically not there - at least until something Really Bad actually happens. He was actually pissed off at his manager making a big deal out of this exploit simply because it ended up on the mainstream press.
- raxxorrax 5y agoTrue. And some apps using log4j2 might escape any user input in a way that they can use the flawed versions and be safe. I believe there is just one theoretical exploit of 1.x known that relates to its socket server. It isn't supported anymore and 2.x is recommended, but I wouldn't call it a security flaw if you use it.