[Users] Last security patch

[Victor d'Agostino]

Hello again

Security apart the article lets suppose a *zimbraMemcachedClientServerList*
empty attribute is always safer, but IMAP performance could be better with
it because the zimbra store would use the memcached service for IMAP
protocol instead of EhCache.

The official Zimbra guide says :
zimbraMemcachedClientServerList : list of host:port for memcached servers;*
set to empty value to disable the use of memcached *

I also have an empty attribute on my Zimbra 8.8.8 multi-store environment.
If I have I/O performance issues on my zimbra stores, should I set the
zimbraMemcachedClientServerList server attribute or let it empty ?

Why does the memcached service is better than EhCache which is memory based
?

Regards,
Victor



Cordialement,
Victor d'Agostino


Le mar. 19 mars 2019 à 14:30, David Touitou <david at network-studio.com> a
écrit :

>
> > Thanks David; it wasn't clear to me that the author was saying in the
> last
> > section that all these exposures had been fixed.
>
> I might be wrong.
> But considereing there are attributed CVE numbers and patches, it looks to
> me as standard procedure:
>  . vulnerability discovered and embargoed
>  . software company contacted
>  . software company acknowledged the vulnerability
>  . software company issued patch
>  . a couple days later, vulnerability went public with explanations
>
> David
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.zetalliance.org/pipermail/users_lists.zetalliance.org/attachments/20190319/4e210cdb/attachment.html>