Sounds good!
Gary
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022, 14:12 Mark Thomas wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is just a heads up.
>
> I've just fixed a bug in DAEMON so I am expecting to tag 1.3.3 tomorrow
> so the next round of Tomcat releases can pick up a version of Daemon
> with the fix.
>
> Mark
>
> ---
Hi all,
This is just a heads up.
I've just fixed a bug in DAEMON so I am expecting to tag 1.3.3 tomorrow
so the next round of Tomcat releases can pick up a version of Daemon
with the fix.
Mark
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
Makes sense I think, thank you Mark.
Gary
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022, 08:41 Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 22/11/2022 13:10, Gary D. Gregory wrote:
> > I am concerned that the recent fixes we've made through OSS fuzz and
> code inspection to validate input are semantically incorrect: The verifier
> should c
On 22/11/2022 13:10, Gary D. Gregory wrote:
I am concerned that the recent fixes we've made through OSS fuzz and code
inspection to validate input are semantically incorrect: The verifier should
catch these errors, not the construction of Java objects. This could be a case
where fuzzing and lo
I am concerned that the recent fixes we've made through OSS fuzz and code
inspection to validate input are semantically incorrect: The verifier should
catch these errors, not the construction of Java objects. This could be a case
where fuzzing and low-level code inspections only appear to find i
