CentOS - Sep 2017 - Apache 2.2 EOL - what is Red Hat's story for RHEL6?

On 09/12/2017 02:58 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 12 September 2017 at 15:29, Alan McKay <alan.mckay at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I have been googling for a few weeks now and not finding anything.
>> Apache 2.2 is EOL at the end of this year.
>>
>> Has Red Hat announced a plan yet on what they are doing in RHEL6?
>>
>> I am assuming they will up-version from 6.9 to 6.10 and as part of
>> that upgrade from Apache 2.2 to Apache 2.4 ?
>>
>> thanks,
>> -Alan
>>
> 
> RHEL 6 is in Production Stage 3 where only security fixes will be done
> to packages. In the past that has meant that no upgrades etc are done
> in the final Prod 3 releases and backports of high level security
> fixes are done. So I don't expect any sort of upgrade.
> 
I don't have any official knowledge, but I would suspect that they will
maintain httpd-2.2 throughout the lifetime of RHEL6.  Security issues
would be backported.  (If older versions of RHEL are any indication)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20170912/ecb6f558/attachment-0001.sig>

> I don't have any official knowledge, but I would suspect that they will
> maintain httpd-2.2 throughout the lifetime of RHEL6.  Security issues
> would be backported.  (If older versions of RHEL are any indication)
The basic problem is though that there won't be any security fixes for 2.2
How can they back port something that does not exist?

Or do you mean you think they'll try to port a fix in 2.4 back to 2.2?
Not even sure that will be possible.

Is there some way to get an official statement from RHEL on this?
Like if I bought a licensed copy of RHEL and used it to open a support
case or something like that?

On 13 September 2017 at 14:10, Alan McKay <alan.mckay at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't have any official knowledge, but I would suspect that they
will
> > maintain httpd-2.2 throughout the lifetime of RHEL6.  Security issues
> > would be backported.  (If older versions of RHEL are any indication)
>
> The basic problem is though that there won't be any security fixes for
2.2
> How can they back port something that does not exist?
>
> Or do you mean you think they'll try to port a fix in 2.4 back to 2.2?
> Not even sure that will be possible.
>
> Is there some way to get an official statement from RHEL on this?
> Like if I bought a licensed copy of RHEL and used it to open a support
> case or something like that?
>

Yes they have engineers who, when a CVE is discovered, will analyse if it
applies to the httpd shipped in RHEL and if there is an issue will write
their own patch (if there is no longer an upstream to directly backport
from).

So long as you use the httpd shipped in RHEL/CentOS you will be protected
against all known CVEs that get discovered - of course ensuring that
mitigating factors such as selinux being enforce also assists with
protection from many/most vulnerabilities in something like httpd.

You will want to read up on:

https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/

and possibly:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-top-support-policies

and certainly:

https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting

So yes if there is a security issue found in the httpd 2.2 shipped with EL6
after December of this year RHEL engineers will develop a patch to
mitigate/fix it and include it in their build of httpd they ship.

On 09/13/2017 08:10 AM, Alan McKay wrote:
>> I don't have any official knowledge, but I would suspect that they
will
>> maintain httpd-2.2 throughout the lifetime of RHEL6.  Security issues
>> would be backported.  (If older versions of RHEL are any indication)
> 
> The basic problem is though that there won't be any security fixes for
2.2
> How can they back port something that does not exist?
> 
> Or do you mean you think they'll try to port a fix in 2.4 back to 2.2?
> Not even sure that will be possible.
> 
> Is there some way to get an official statement from RHEL on this?
> Like if I bought a licensed copy of RHEL and used it to open a support
> case or something like that?
Red Hat will provide security updates to whatever solution that they
have in RHEL-6 until end of life .. that is what they do and why their
Enterprise Linux has subscription costs .. see:

https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting

The CentOS Project, on the other hand, does not make any security claims
of any kind for CentOS Linux at all.  We rebuild whatever source code
Red Hat releases for RHEL and the user must make sure it meets any
security requirements they have.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20170913/9f694186/attachment-0001.sig>