Le sam. 5 nov. 2022 à 19:03, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> On Sat, Nov 5, 2022, 09:09 Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org>
> wrote:
>
> > After log4shell last year, I no longer have any patience for third
> > party logging libraries, full stop.
> >
>
> Uh? CVEs have occurred in all types of libraries, there is nothing about
> logging that makes it more CVE-prone. You might as well be talking about
> all third party libraries.
>

Gale is different is cve comes from the jre or a lib. Jre is a must upgrade
anyway, a lib is additional work so JUL wins there by design.
Guess it was the point.



> Gary
>
>
> > IMO logging should be done through java.util.logging, nothing else.
> > This is fully functional since Java 1.4 twenty years ago. Log4j,
> > slf4j, plexus-logging, etc. are all efforts to solve a problem we
> > don't have any more. They are not needed and they introduce dependency
> > problems and security issues.
> >
> > For one example, Google has used java.util.logging exclusively in all
> > its internal Java code since at least 2008 and never needed anything
> > more. This is a matter of policy inside Google, and as a result of
> > this log4shell was close to a non-event for one of the largest Java
> > shops on the planet. It wasn't a complete non-event only because of
> > third party libraries that depended on log4j and open source projects
> > that weren't quite as strict about following Google rules.
> >
> > To the extent Maven and its plugins are currently dependent on SLF4J
> > and others, this should be fixed. We should not continue down this
> > path in any new or updated code. To be clear:
> >
> > 1. I am willing to do some of the work of ripping out old logging
> > calls and replacing them with j.u.l.
> >
> > 2. It is OK to have mixed logging during a transition period.
> >
> > 3. It is OK if some log messages are lost or appear when they're not
> > expected during a transition period. Logging is never critical
> > functionality.
> >
> > What I am not willing to accept are dependency management problems and
> > major security holes like log4shell due to optional, convenience
> > functionality.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 10:57 AM Slawomir Jaranowski
> > <s.jaranow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I want to start ( again :-) ) a discussion about logging in Maven
> > plugins.
> > >
> > > First I agree that plugin developers should use logging methods
> provided
> > by
> > > Plugin api.
> > >
> > > But we can not expect plugin developers to write everything from
> scratch.
> > > In many cases they may want to use an external library to do tasks
> needed
> > > by the plugin.
> > >
> > > We don't have any control over what logging framework is used in the
> > > external library used by plugin developers.
> > >
> > > We also maintain some libraries which can be used by plugin and also as
> > > standalone in another project.
> > > In such a case the question is - what logging we should use [1]?
> > >
> > > Last time I did a test, I use Java util logging from JDK in the Maven
> > > plugin.
> > > I see that Java util logging use default configuration, eg. we will
> have
> > > two lines for one log event.
> > > Even more options -q and -X have no effect for such a logger.
> > >
> > > One of the solution for such problem is using "Bridging" methods
> > supported
> > > by slf4j [2]
> > > Probably all of existing and future logging frameworks can not be
> > covered -
> > > but most of common using will be.
> > >
> > > I hope that, even if we will want to change the logging framework used
> > > internally in Maven, we can also use the same method.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-dependency-analyzer/pull/71
> > > [2] https://www.slf4j.org/legacy.html
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sławomir Jaranowski
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > elh...@ibiblio.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to