geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Geronimo 2.0 Release suspended due to security issue found before release
Date Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:23:13 GMT


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> All,
> 
> Earlier today one of the Geronimo committers discovered a bug in the 
> command line deployer where a null user / password on the deployer 
> command line will allow a user to deploy modules to a 2.0 server.  This 
> is an unacceptable security exposure and as such we have abandoned the 
> release of Geronimo 2.0.
> 
> Donald Woods is going to open a JIRA for this issue and Hernan will 
> create a news item on our web page.

GERONIMO-3404 was opened for this.

> 
> At this point we need to discuss how to move forward with a 2.0 release.
> 
> I think we should delete the tags/2.0.0 entry and replace it with a text 
> file that notes the svn rev of the tree before deletion.  The purpose of 
> this is to avoid anyone from picking up that source tree and using it to 
> build a server with a known security exposure.  Unless there is 
> disagreement I'd like to do that tomorrow allowing some time for 
> discussion.  We can always put it back.
> 
> There are several options for the 2.0 release:
> 
> 1. Use the branches/2.0 to spin up a new release as 2.0.1.
>   If we do this there are a number of fixes that need to be verified, 
> We'd need to close out the SNAPSHOT releases again, or at least revisit 
> them.
>   Respin and re-tck a new release.
> 
> 2. Take the tags/2.0.0 to create a branches/2.0.1
>   This would mean that we need to update branches/2.0 to 2.0.2-SNAPSHOT
>   Copy the existing tag over and apply the security fixes.  Repsin and 
> release.
> 
> Personally, I vote for option 2.  Based on my experience, closing out 
> the SNAPSHOTs is and introducing little changes will cause us to restart 
> the release process.

+1 on option #2.


> 
> I'd like to hear other people's input but having done the release 
> several times option 2 is the fastest.  I think option 1 will cause us 
> to not release until September.
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message