Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitbucket recently has shockingly poor reliability. Quite often you see nothing on the status page but see other people having issues on twitter. We've nearly migrated everything to github, plus github has better features and more powerful.
They've been doing a large transformation recently to put it on a new platform. Not saying that's an excuse, but it is an explanation for some of the problems they've had.
US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
171–180 of 344 posts
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Helpful links, looks like failure to sanitize input. Classic. But on the “attacks coming from”, I’ve never understood putting stock in these. Aren’t these all going to be proxies and botnets?
Failure to sanitize input is one thing, but the bigger issue to me is that, with so many of these Java server installations, that a simple injection can immediately lead to "game over" from a server takeover perspective. For the bug in question, I bet the vast majority of webservers never need the ability to call unrestricted Runtime.exec(), yet access to that is just one unsanitized input away from complete control…
I absolutely agree that runtimes, frameworks, and server code should do a better job at trust and sanitization, but you will always get to a point where if you want to get something done, you need to do the work.
I guess I’m skeptical that eval() or runtime.exe could or even should take in lists and configs of what the code is allowed to do and monitor for it during execution. It seems like doing that would add countless issues and complexity, but more so just kick the can down the code to another layer with the same eventual issue.
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
99% agreed. Reserving 1% because I'd strike "lesser technical" from your final sentence. The misleading quote is simply not correct. It is misleading because it's not true. It says Confluence hosted in the cloud is not vulnerable. False statement that can mislead anyone regardless of how technical they are.
Let's say 99.5%, because Atlassian hosted offering is called "Atlassian Cloud"
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Just embed a confluence page into a task" Except that confluence and JIRA are both so slow that you'll still be there 2 minutes later waiting for it to load. Perhaps not everybody's experience is so bad? I don't understand how anyone could consider these products convenient given how ridiculously slow they were. We used to do refinement meetings over video call (I guess everyone is these days) inputting into JIRA,…
We use the cloud version, I've edited huge Confluence pages and it's typically very snappy. Jira likewise. Could be an under-resourced on-premise deployment?
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
99% agreed. Reserving 1% because I'd strike "lesser technical" from your final sentence. The misleading quote is simply not correct. It is misleading because it's not true. It says Confluence hosted in the cloud is not vulnerable. False statement that can mislead anyone regardless of how technical they are.
its' misleading and it gives off the notion that the cloud is more secure so you should migrate your instance to our managed "Cloud" version.
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#176Atlassian was so kind to update their mailing lists somewhere over the last year or so. Previously, they would email the 'technical contact' of the license about any vulnerabilities. They quietly switched to some other notification system and never informed us about it. Hence we missed the update and got a free Bitcoin miner. Thanks Atlassian, I'll make sure to get your products out of the door as soon as possible. […
Another issue is that they sent out the initial communication on August 25th (which I did receive), but the original wording indicated that it only affected servers that allowed user self-registration. We didn’t have that enabled, so I held off for a bit because the risk seemed lower and our upgrade process is a bit arduous (we have quite a few customizations on the server and need to perform all upgrades on a test i…
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#177https://www.cvedetails.com/product/8170/Atlassian-Jira.html?...
I would also say based on experience that if they tell you that an exploit can't be used against any of their other software that you shouldn't ever believe them.
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#178The good thing about the fact that Atlassian offers both on-prem and cloud versions of their offerings is, everyone is now aware of the awful engineering practices that underpin their products. We have to assume that there are problems of a similar nature in their cloud service, which is way more of a problem considering the number of orgs that depend on the JIRA SaaS offering. Maybe the founders could have used some…
A far stretch to conclude that this event can equate to awful engineering. The rest of this your comment reads like you continue to be naive to Atlassian’s success. I have to think many people do find unique value in their products (myself included), some people don’t laugh rudely when they hear what folks are working on, and I think that shows in the overall achievements of the Atlassian team and product. I’ve witne…
Nothing Atlassian does is that much better than past tooling, it all comes down to how you want to run your org, what discipline you apply, and where you apply it.
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#179The good thing about the fact that Atlassian offers both on-prem and cloud versions of their offerings is, everyone is now aware of the awful engineering practices that underpin their products. We have to assume that there are problems of a similar nature in their cloud service, which is way more of a problem considering the number of orgs that depend on the JIRA SaaS offering. Maybe the founders could have used some…
> The good thing about the fact that Atlassian offers both on-prem and cloud versions of their offerings is, everyone is now aware of the awful engineering practices that underpin their products. Regardless of what one thinks about Atlassian, this is a completely ridiculous bullshit statement, and anyone who works in the world of business software knows it. I don't think there is a company out there that hasn't had c…
Think about that for a second. If someone finds a vulnerability in JIRA, they don’t just find a vulnerability in that software: they’ve got access to support tickets, issue tracking, etc about lots of vulnerabilities in lots of software. That’s a big deal.
The fact that the US government had to step in and say PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY, rather than Atlassian going into a Code Red situation, shows that they just don’t take the level of responsibility they’ve been given as seriously as is required for what they’re doing. This isn’t just some lousy app having a CVE. This is the keys to the kingdom for a lot of very critical software. This is systemic risk. The problem isn’t the code, it’s the culture.
If you “work in the world of business software” and you think that’s a “complete bullshit statement,” I really hope you don’t work on anything for which such systemic risk is possible. Because, to turn your statement back on you, that’s a complete bullshit way to treat the responsibility you have for the data with which you’ve been trusted. Go build a social media app or an online shopping site or something, and stay out of critical systems that can create cascading vulnerabilities.
Re: US Cybercom says mass exploitation of Atlassian Confluence vulnerability ongoing
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
We use the cloud version, I've edited huge Confluence pages and it's typically very snappy. Jira likewise. Could be an under-resourced on-premise deployment?
I think they’re talking about the front-end, not the server. FWIW both Confluence and Jira are abysmally slow on my machine (new MBP) on the cloud version.
Maybe I'm closer to their servers. Or you're using Safari.