Comment by gnabgib
1 day ago
Yeah.. their text (unedited).. Maybe they meant 5.6? Only 8.x is "supported" currently, though. I wonder how 3&4 avoided it :)
1 day ago
Yeah.. their text (unedited).. Maybe they meant 5.6? Only 8.x is "supported" currently, though. I wonder how 3&4 avoided it :)
> I wonder how 3&4 avoided it :)
Probably the same way log4j 1.x avoided log4shell: the vulnerable code was introduced on a later release.
A: I'm writing a post, what versions
B: "5.6, 7, 8“
A: fixes a "typo" ok so "5, 6, 7, 8"