Yeah something like 10-15 years ago I thought for just the simple action of printing a file, it was way easier in Ubuntu than Windows, simply because they included a lot of drivers in the distro by default, while in Windows land I still had to visit the printer manufacturer's website for drivers -- or use the included CD! I try to avoid needing to do anything more complex than that. (Scanning I've always done with a USB stick plugged directly into the printer.) Things kind of got worse again in recent years with the removal of the standalone GUI for administration in favor of a web interface, and various ongoing modularization efforts, in theory cups3 will work even better and only support IPP/AirPrint: https://openprinting.github.io/current/#the-new-architecture...
at least for awhile this is how bluesky/atproto worked. afaik they only ran into issues when the number of users on each server overwhelmed how many files would fit comfortably in a single directory (which is obviously a large number)
my understanding matches yours. I don't think this article is particularly clear about why rapid7 would threaten to disclose a vulnerability before a patch is ready and then subsequently get angry that jetbrains put out a patch to fix the issue
so rapid7 is mad that jetbrains fixed the vulns they reported? isn't that the point of reporting vulnerabilities? why is rapid7 threatening to release the details in 24 hours?
> Rapid7 says it reported the two TeamCity vulnerabilities in mid-February, claiming JetBrains soon after suggested releasing patches for the flaws before publicly disclosing them.
So JetBrains wanted to have a patch ready before disclosing the vulnerability publicly. It seems they were working on it and were working with Rapid7. I am struggling to think how it would be better for users if an unpatched vulnerability is released before a patch is available. What's the thinking here, that users will take additional precautions to secure the application while they wait for a patch?
> Rapid7 spotted fresh patches for CVE-2024-27198 and CVE-2024-27199 on Monday, without a published security advisory and without telling the researchers.
Rapid7 reported the vulnerabilities mid-Feb. Jetbrains turned around with patches about 2 weeks later, and published them yesterday. The CVE was literally created yesterday. Isn't it a bit premature to claim "silence"?
They released patches without saying they were related to a vulnerability and without notifying Rapid7. That is the textbook definition of what a silent patch is.
I'm not sure how to reword it in another way that would help you understand that Jetbrains did what is called "silent patching".
Maybe this paragraph from the article makes it clear?
>Rapid7 claims that after more than a week of radio silence from JetBrains on the coordinated disclosure matter, Rapid7 spotted fresh patches for CVE-2024-27198 and CVE-2024-27199 on Monday, without a published security advisory and without telling the researchers.
That makes this whole thing fall under Rapid7's silent patching policy.
Above I linked to a blog post Jetbrains put out on March 3rd, on Sunday. It details the vulnerability. March 3rd is before March 4th, so it seems they did not silently patch anything but published the patch and details concurrently.
And this is the part Rapid7 presumably took issue with.
>At this point, we made a decision not to make a coordinated disclosure with Rapid7
As well as
>We published a blog post about the release. This blog post intentionally didn’t mention the security issues in detail
Which is presumably the blog post that Rapid7 saw, which triggered their silent patching policy.
Although, after reading all the blog posts (from Jetrbrains, and from Rapid7), I think this is a much more standard affair than The Reg tries to spin in its article.
the context is "yes, you were down by 14, but your team just lined up and scored a TD on the last play. you have to make the decision whether to kick the XP or go for 2. since you just scored 6, you are now down 8"
it is confusing because the conversation is taking place after you just scored
reply