Log4j mitigation

Mon Dec 13 14:50:11 UTC 2021

But in a world where the attacker can leak out a whole 16-bit integer,
monitoring that 0.003% for two-port states may be irrelevant.
Not saying you shall not, but you will miss 99.997%. Agree?

On 13 Dec 2021, at 15:22, Joe Greco wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 01:49:07PM +0100, J??rg Kost wrote:
>> I understand what you want to say, but I disagree in this point. When
>> you have a cup full of water and someone remotely can drill holes into
>> the out shell, just checking the bottom for leaks won't help. You may
>> want a new mug instead. :-) The initial posting was about looking at the
>> bottom only.
>
> Maybe I'm the only one who puts cheap wireless leak sensors near toilets,
> drains, and other less-likely sources of water, in addition to the big
> alarm system hardwired ones in all the usual places.
>
> Of course, then again, we also have two AC sump pumps and one that is
> battery backup, all protected by generator and ATS.
>
> I prefer to know.  You, of course, are free to disregard as you see
> fit.