Closed shaikzakiriitm closed 2 years ago
@shaikzakiriitm
Shouldn't the confluent-log4j
have scope <scope>test</scope>
if its only needed to be included for the tests?
@shaikzakiriitm I think we should not include confluent-log4j as it is replaced with reload4j recently in other connectors due to this - https://confluentinc.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/~913794610/pages/2772764716/Backport+reload4j+to+replace+Confluent-log4j
Fixed it, migrated from slf4j-log4j2 to slf4j-reload4j
@shaikzakiriitm Shouldn't the
confluent-log4j
have scope<scope>test</scope>
if its only needed to be included for the tests?
got rid of confluent-log4j now.
Problem
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-36518
Solution
Upgraded the common version, to bring in the version of jackson-databind which has the fix for this cve. Also had to import
confluent-log4j
to avoid the following error in tests, where log4j dependency wasn't being pulled in.Also found spotbugs validate check failure listed below
Addressed by making
random
instance variable a constant (final) per task instance. Verified that using same seed in user configs, two connector instances generate same stream of data.Does this solution apply anywhere else?
If yes, where?
applies to other connectors as well. Also in all the branches of datagen.
Test Strategy
All existing unit tests succeed. Manually verified the jackson-databind dependency being pulled in.
Also, deployed the snapshot version of connector with these (this pr's) changes locally and verified that two instances of the connector with same seed generate same data stream with USERS quickstart.
Testing done:
Release Plan