log4j-scan VS Laminar

Testing the image with github.com/fullhunt/log4j-scan and https://github.com/quay/clair shows no vulnerabilities

https://github.com/cisagov/log4j-scanner https://github.com/fullhunt/log4j-scan https://github.com/portswigger/log4shell-scanner

https://github.com/fullhunt/log4j-scan Used this one for my network. Worked just fine and no setup required to run on my host.

The team at FullHunt provided an open-source tool called log4j-scan, an automated and extensive scanner for finding vulnerable Log4j hosts. It allows teams to scan their infrastructure but also test for WAF (Web Application Firewall) bypasses that can result in code execution. The tool has several options but in short, you pass to the tool the URL to scan and you get a report on the vulnerabilities found. For example:

Yep. Seems like https://github.com/fullhunt/log4j-scan/issues/80 would fix my issue. Thanks for the assist.

*Laminar - I like how simple this is

I use Laminar CI for this: https://laminar.ohwg.net/

Delve into Laminar would be my suggestion.

I like Laminar as a lightweight, self-hosted CI solution.

For a lightweight solution, I like to recommend Laminar CI.

Laminar

Laminar is a lightweight and modular CI system licensed under GPLv3. I like that it allows me to build the CI solution that fits my given use case the best.

I find Laminar quite interesting in this space. It might help you too to build your own lightweight CI solution that does exactly what your use case requires.

My continuous integration / continuous deployoment system is based on Laminar CI (blog post series). It serves various purposes:

jftr: There is another project with this name which is deceptively similar, but also very different… (quoting the README): Laminar is a lightweight and modular Continuous Integration service for Linux. It is self-hosted and developer-friendly, eschewing a configuration UI in favour of simple version-controllable configuration files and scripts.