Skip to main content



Log4J JNDI Vulnerability

 

This post is an extension of https://techdevins.blogspot.com/2021/09/solving-jenkins-maven-build-xray-log4j.html
Apart from fix that was discussed in https://techdevins.blogspot.com/2021/09/solving-jenkins-maven-build-xray-log4j.html. It is required to upgrade Log4J to 2.15.0 or above due to JNDI attack. 

Refer below figure to understand the deserialization of untrusted data which can be exploited to remotely execute arbitrary code.




There are certain posts which suggest to set below property 
  • log4j2.formatMsgNoLookups
But, that's serious vulnerability, you shouldn't contemplate these workarounds and upgrade Log4j jars. Refer https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/security.html

"A new CVE (CVE-2021-45046, see above) was raised for this.

Other insufficient mitigation measures are: setting system property log4j2.formatMsgNoLookups or environment variable LOG4J_FORMAT_MSG_NO_LOOKUPS to true for releases >= 2.10, or modifying the logging configuration to disable message lookups with %m{nolookups}, %msg{nolookups} or %message{nolookups} for releases >= 2.7 and <= 2.14.1.

The reason these measures are insufficient is that, in addition to the Thread Context attack vector mentioned above, there are still code paths in Log4j where message lookups could occur: known examples are applications that use Logger.printf("%s", userInput), or applications that use a custom message factory, where the resulting messages do not implement StringBuilderFormattable. There may be other attack vectors.

The safest thing to do is to upgrade Log4j to a safe version, or remove the JndiLookup class from the log4j-core jar."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts

Unix Server ( Edge Node ) hangs when there are many jobs running on hadoop cluster started from Unix Edge Node.

  When a unix server or an edge node is running lots of jobs (like Spark, Hadoop, or custom batch processes), crashes happen. For example. For example a process might hit a segementation fault, memory issue or ay other runtime issue. By default, if ulimit -c is not 0, the OS will create core dump. Core dump are written to disk and can be very large, sometimes hundreds of MBs or even GBs per process. What we realized was that when multiple processes crash at the same time, the system suddenly tries to write core files to disk. This was leading to DisK I/O spikes. Thus, node was becoming unresponsive. This was also leading CPU spike because OS was handling crash logging. Setting "ulimit -c 0" disables core dumps. This way we lose ability to debug crashes via core dump But, kept production edge nodes stable. On most Linux systems, by default, "core dumps" are written in current working directory of the process that crashes. Linux allows you to change core dump file nam...
Post a Comment
Read more




VPN testing checklist

 To test: Is VPN active? Is it leaking? Does it look residential? Does it alter network fingerprints? Public IP Test (Basic Detection) - curl ipinfo.io DNS Leak Test - nslookup google.com MTU Test (Encapsulation Detection) - ping 8.8.8.8 -f -l 1472 TCP MSS Inspection - Use Wireshark and Look for SYN packets. Traceroute Path Test - tracert 8.8.8.8 WebRTC Leak Test - browserleaks.com/webrtc IPv6 Leak Test - test-ipv6.com Latency / Jitter Test - ping -n 50 8.8.8.8. VPN usually causes: More Jitters and Latency. Reverse DNS (PTR Record) - nslookup <your-public-ip> IP Reputation Check - Like most IP's from VPN Providers like Express VPN, etc. are blacklisted and all. Look for: Proxy/VPN classification, Hosting provider tagging
Post a Comment
Read more




Spark-JDBC connection with Oracle Fails - java.sql.SQLSyntaxErrorException: ORA-00903: invalid table name

  While connecting Spark with Oracle JDBC, one may observe exception like below -  spark.read.format("jdbc"). option("url", "jdbc:oracle:thin:@//oraclehost:1521/servicename"). option("dbtable", "mytable"). option("user", "myuser").option("driver", "oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver") option("password", "mypassword"). load().write.parquet("/data/out") java.sql.SQLSyntaxErrorException: ORA-00903: invalid table name at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4CTTIoer.processError(T4CTTIoer.java:447) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4CTTIoer.processError(T4CTTIoer.java:396) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4C8Oall.processError(T4C8Oall.java:951) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4CTTIfun.receive(T4CTTIfun.java:513) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4CTTIfun.doRPC(T4CTTIfun.java:227) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4C8Oall.doOALL(T4C8Oall.java:531) at oracle.jdbc.driver.T4CPreparedStatement.doOall8(T4CPreparedStatement.java:208) ...
Post a Comment
Read more




Spring MongoDB Rest API not returning response in 90 seconds which is leading to client timeout

  We have Spring Boot  Rest API deployed in Kubernetes cluster which integrates with MongoDB to fetch the data.  MongoDB is fed with data by a real time Spark & NiFi job.  Our clients complained that for a request what they send they don't have response within 90 seconds. Consider it like an OMS ( Order ManagEment System).  On further analysis, we found that Spark & NiFi processing is happenning within 10 seconds after consuming response data from Kafka. Thus, initally out thought was that it due to delay from upstream to produce data in to Kafka.  Thankfully, our data had create / request  timestamp, and when response was received, and when response was inserted into MongoDB. Subtracting response insert time from request time seemed to be well within 90 seconds. But, still client did timeout on not seeing a response within 90 seconds. This led to confusion on our side.  But, then we realized it was due to Read Preference . We updated this...
Post a Comment
Read more




MongoDB Regex Query taking more time in Production but same query perform well in UAT

   We came across a situation where-in, MongoDB Query was taking more time in Production like 10 seconds and 4.2 seconds but same query performed well in UAT taking under 400 ms. The very first thought that was evident to us that it is because of amount of data which differed in UAT and Production. Then we ran following to see the execution plan -   db.collection.aggregate(<queries>).explain() This gave us Winning and Rejected Plans. Under which, we analyzed that although it was using 'IXSCAN.' But, it was incorrect index- as we had one compound index built on time field and other fields, and there was other index just on time field for TTL purposes. Winning plan picked TTL index rather than compound index. Thus, we dropped TTL index and built TTL index on a different time field.  That got our query performance time from 10 seconds to 726 ms. Also, for other query the performance came down from 8 seconds to 4.3 seconds. Then, we ran following -  ...
Post a Comment
Read more