Planned maintenance is scheduled for the week of June 15th - the exact date and time will be announced soon.
See More Details
Ask Questions and Find Answers
Important:
Ask is now read-only. You can review any existing questions and answers, but not add anything new.
But - don't panic! While ask is no more, we've replaced it with discuss - the new Liferay Discussion Forum! Read more here here or just visit the site here:
discuss.liferay.com
Liferay Portal p_p_id parameter vulnerable to persistent cross-site script
Hi,
I found this report recently.
US-CERT Vulnerability Note VU#750796
Liferay Portal p_p_id parameter vulnerable to persistent cross-site scripting http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/750796
To solve this problem, should I obtain the source code of 5.3 from Subversion?
Now, We are developing using 5.2.3 ext and plugin_sdk.
Is there compatibility of 5.2 and 5.3?
Thanks.
I found this report recently.
US-CERT Vulnerability Note VU#750796
Liferay Portal p_p_id parameter vulnerable to persistent cross-site scripting http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/750796
To solve this problem, should I obtain the source code of 5.3 from Subversion?
Now, We are developing using 5.2.3 ext and plugin_sdk.
Is there compatibility of 5.2 and 5.3?
Thanks.
I truly wish that Liferay would but an announcement portlet in the control panel for administrators and omni-admins so that they could push out important announcements like that to all of their users.
Lisa Simpson:
I truly wish that Liferay would but an announcement portlet in the control panel for administrators and omni-admins so that they could push out important announcements like that to all of their users.
The good news is, that now you can do this yourself - at least in unpatched versions.
(ducks and hides in the dark)
Look at the patches in the FishEye tab at LPS-6034 and see if the patches to trunk still apply without any work to the 5.2.3 codebase. Chances are that - when the code has changed - you have to look in a different line, but not in a different class.
Thank you for your advice.
I read FishEye. Therefore I understood that there was a difference in 5.2.3 and 6.0.0 (5.3).
Because there was not a function called HtmlUtil#escapeJS in 5.2.3, I decided to use org.apache.commons.lang.StringEscapeUtils#escapeJavaScript instead.
However, I worry by this method about correct.
I read FishEye. Therefore I understood that there was a difference in 5.2.3 and 6.0.0 (5.3).
Because there was not a function called HtmlUtil#escapeJS in 5.2.3, I decided to use org.apache.commons.lang.StringEscapeUtils#escapeJavaScript instead.
However, I worry by this method about correct.
Kazutaka KAMIYA:
Because there was not a function called HtmlUtil#escapeJS in 5.2.3, I decided to use org.apache.commons.lang.StringEscapeUtils#escapeJavaScript instead.
You could also just add HtmlUtil to the backport and add it to the patch. This way you'd have the same effect as the patch from FishEye
I need to back port this fix into a 5.1.2 code base. However, fisheye is down for the count with no hope of ever coming back. Can someone post what was actually changed to fix this?
Thank you,
Thank you,
With fisheye being down, my only guess would be to hunt down the relevant commit in svn with your favourite svn client. The commits contain the ticket number as comment.
Sorry
Sorry
Community
Company
Feedback