1.x is not vulnerable to this exploit... as the functionality was added in
2.x.

However, 1.x is vulnerable to other RCE exploits.

Charles


On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:52 AM James H. H. Lampert via MIDRANGE-L <
midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 12/14/21 6:32 AM, Greg Wilburn wrote:
I thought I read somewhere that older versions (i.e 1.x) did not have
the vulnerability.

As of yesterday, the general consensus was that log4j 1.x isn't
vulnerable, but that is by no means certain, as log4j 1.x hasn't been
supported for some time, and the log4j people at Apache have been
concentrating their efforts on 2.x.

--
JHHL
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: https://amazon.midrange.com


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.