ID |
Date |
Icon |
Author |
Author Email |
Category |
OS |
ELOG Version |
Subject |
69490
|
Mon Mar 7 17:46:39 2022 |
| Jan Just Keijser | janjust@nikhef.nl | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | > > I trust Stefan is reading this thread and will do something about it. My vote would
> > be to remove the download link to the windows executables and ask Debian to remove
> > the elog package. I think they have a way for upstream developers (Stefan) to request
> > removal of unmaintained out-of-date insecure versions of their stuff. ROOT
> > was in the same situation years ago, the Debian package for ROOT was very old version,
> > also built incorrectly, and everybody complained to us that our stuff does
> > not work (midas, rootana, etc).
>
> Yeah, I have to recompile the Windows version. Unfortunately my old Windows PC is gone, I
> switched now completely to MacOSX and Linux. Probably have to borrow something from somewhere.
> If anybody can compile the Windows version with the current source code I would be happy.
>
> Stefan
FWIW: you could cross-compile on Linux using
make CC=x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc CFLAGS="-D_MSC_VER -DHAVE_VASPRintF -Imxml" LIBS="-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition -ladvapi32 -lwsock32 -lssl -lcrypto"
or so I thought... with build 3.1.4 - 395e101 I did manage, finally.
However, with the latest git version everything seems to have been renamed to .cxx files (though it's still plain C ??!?!?) and my quick and dirty compile hack did not work. The binaries do work, I can start the server and access it via the web interface. |
69491
|
Mon Mar 7 22:07:54 2022 |
| Laurent Jean-Rigaud | lollspam@free.fr | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | > > I trust Stefan is reading this thread and will do something about it. My vote would
> > be to remove the download link to the windows executables and ask Debian to remove
> > the elog package. I think they have a way for upstream developers (Stefan) to request
> > removal of unmaintained out-of-date insecure versions of their stuff. ROOT
> > was in the same situation years ago, the Debian package for ROOT was very old version,
> > also built incorrectly, and everybody complained to us that our stuff does
> > not work (midas, rootana, etc).
>
> Yeah, I have to recompile the Windows version. Unfortunately my old Windows PC is gone, I
> switched now completely to MacOSX and Linux. Probably have to borrow something from somewhere.
> If anybody can compile the Windows version with the current source code I would be happy.
>
> Stefan
Hi Stefan,
I don't find any howto to build elog under windows, so i tried to compile elog-latest sources with cygwin (packages gcc + openssl-devel + openldap-devel + make).
It builds, i could start elogd.exe and connect to localhost:8080 !
I generate a zip with cygwin dll needed to launch elogd and tools. I think they could be enclosed (maybe the cygwin licence file have to be added ?).
Btw it should be possible to crossbuild it under Mac or Linux. The problem is to test it ;-). On Mac, you can use UTM to create a Windows VM to do the work.
Bye
Laurent |
Attachment 1: elog-3.1.4-395e101.zip
|
69493
|
Wed Mar 9 17:55:31 2022 |
| Jan Just Keijser | janjust@nikhef.nl | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | I've built the last C version of elog in git, revision 1ebfd06c using mingw-64 ; the resulting binaries work for me on Windows 2019.
Attached is a zip file with the binaries.
I was not able to create a new installer, these are just the executables |
Attachment 1: elog-3.1.4-1ebfd06c-win64.zip
|
69503
|
Tue Apr 12 08:55:55 2022 |
| Gys Wuyts | gys.wuyts@gmail.com | Question | Windows | 3.1.4 (latest) | "User stamp" icon like Time Stamp in Body | Hello,
Is there a possibility to use like the time stamp a user stamp: by clicking the button in the main text entry it adds the username, just like the time stamp button does: Tue Apr 12 08:58:46 2022 ?
I searched but I'm not sure how this would be correctly named.
Thanks,
G |
Draft
|
Tue Apr 12 09:06:49 2022 |
| Stefan Ritt | stefan.ritt@psi.ch | Question | Windows | 3.1.4 (latest) | Re: "User stamp" icon like Time Stamp in Body | <p> </p>
<table align="center" cellspacing="1" style="border:1px solid #486090; width:98%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color:#486090">Gys Wuyts wrote:</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="background-color:#FFFFB0">
<p>Hello,</p>
<p>Is there a possibility to use like the time stamp a user stamp: by clicking the button in the main text entry it adds the username, just like the time stamp button does: Tue Apr 12 08:58:46 2022 ?</p>
<p>I searched but I'm not sure how this would be correctly named.</p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p> </p>
<p>G</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p> </p>
Tue Apr 12 09:06:49 2022 |
69507
|
Mon Apr 18 19:16:36 2022 |
| Florian Heigl | me@florianheigl.me | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | > > I trust Stefan is reading this thread and will do something about it. My vote would
> > be to remove the download link to the windows executables and ask Debian to remove
> > the elog package. I think they have a way for upstream developers (Stefan) to request
> > removal of unmaintained out-of-date insecure versions of their stuff. ROOT
> > was in the same situation years ago, the Debian package for ROOT was very old version,
> > also built incorrectly, and everybody complained to us that our stuff does
> > not work (midas, rootana, etc).
>
> Yeah, I have to recompile the Windows version. Unfortunately my old Windows PC is gone, I
> switched now completely to MacOSX and Linux. Probably have to borrow something from somewhere.
> If anybody can compile the Windows version with the current source code I would be happy.
it would be good if the current state was listed in https://elog.psi.ch/elogs/Vulnerabilities/
It seems there's now updated builds for at least windows, and the debian package still outdated?
Personally, I don't think removing download links and pulling packages should be more than a temporary measure.
Treating people fairly IMHO means they should be able to reach a safe version by the same means that brought and left them exposed.
A clear central source would be best, one that has
- package autobuilds
- source
- cve list
If I understand correctly, currently only the source is up to date?
(I found py_elog on Github, so it could be an easy option to mirror ELOG there and let some free service handle the autobuilds.
I don't know how well one can flag vulnerabilities there, but likely it's possible, and ideally more people would help there.)
p.s.: My hat is off to the sysadmin who checked carefully, I wanted to introduce ELOG in a windows-centric place and I can't swear I would have checked this (official) download as well. |
69510
|
Tue Apr 19 15:47:59 2022 |
| Daniel Pfuhl | daniel.pfuhl@medizin.uni-leipzig.de | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | > I've built the last C version of elog in git, revision 1ebfd06c using mingw-64 ; the resulting binaries work for me on Windows 2019.
> Attached is a zip file with the binaries.
> I was not able to create a new installer, these are just the executables
I tried to just exchange the attached binaries in my installation but this didn't worked.
elogd was not able to start.
Regards,
daniel |
69511
|
Tue Apr 19 17:02:57 2022 |
| Jan Just Keijser | janjust@nikhef.nl | Question | Windows | 3.1.4-a04faf9f | Re: Vulnerability? | > > I've built the last C version of elog in git, revision 1ebfd06c using mingw-64 ; the resulting binaries work for me on Windows 2019.
> > Attached is a zip file with the binaries.
> > I was not able to create a new installer, these are just the executables
>
> I tried to just exchange the attached binaries in my installation but this didn't worked.
> elogd was not able to start.
hmmm strange - did you get an error message or did the binary simply not start? I've only tested this on a single Windows machine.... |
|