IMPORTANT SECURITY ANNOUNCEMENT

Recently the POODLE vulnerability has been announced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POODLE 

ELOG is prone to this vulnerability if it runs directly the SSL protocol and can be accessed from the internet. If ELOG runs behind an Apache proxy, and the Apache server has been correctly configured (disabled the SSLv23 protocols), ELOG is safe as well.

To fix this vulnerability, ELOG needs to be recompiled after the attached patch has been applied. This prohibits ELOG to fallback to the insecure SSLv2 & v3 protocols and only use the safe TLSv1 protocol.

If you do not know how to recompile ELOG, please do not run ELOG directly accessible from the internet until the next binary release has been published.

/Stefan Ritt

ELOG contains Kerberos authentication at a basic level. If I'm not mistaken, the Windows Domain controller is based on Kerberos. I do not have any 2008 or 2012 domain controller, so I cannot test, but it's worth giving it a try.

/Stefan 

Andreas Luedeke wrote:

Chris Jennings wrote: Chris Jennings wrote: I have an attribute formatted as a date (but not labeled as date) and is sorted as second priority. The sort works fine until I enter a date older than Jan 1st 2002. When I do this it is sorted as the latest. Is this a bug or simply not designed to use dates this old? Thanks in advance, Chris  Sorry, my mistake. The cutoff date is anything before September 9th 2001 does not sort. I think I remember that this has been discussed earlier: it is a little bug in elogd. You can see where it comes from if you type in the little command 'date -d "9-Sep-2001 3:46:40" +%s' Converted to "seconds of the epoche" (seconds since 1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC) the date "9-Sep-2001 3:46:40" has one digit more than "9-Sep-2001 3:46:39". Since elog makes a string comparison, suddenly 1'000'000'000 is less than 999'999'999; therefore the wrong sorting. Workaround: you can modify your old entries and add a leading zero to all entries where your specific date field starts with a '9'. Stefan: you should fix it at least well before 20-Nov-2286 18:46:40, when the same bug strikes again!

Ok, well before 2286 approaches I fixed that bug and committed it to the GIT repository (master branch).

/Stefan 

Workaround: you can modify your old entries and add a leading zero to all entries where your specific date field starts with a '9'.

Stefan: you should fix it at least well before 20-Nov-2286 18:46:40, when the same bug strikes again!

 Sorry, my mistake. The cutoff date is anything before September 9th 2001 does not sort.

I have an attribute formatted as a date (but not labeled as date) and is sorted as second priority. The sort works fine until I enter a date older than Jan 1st 2002. When I do this it is sorted as the latest. Is this a bug or simply not designed to use dates this old?

Thanks in advance,

Chris

Just change the body { } entry in the CSS file. Here is a good tutorial: http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_syntax.asp