> Rapid7 says it reported the two TeamCity vulnerabilities in mid-February, claiming JetBrains soon after suggested releasing patches for the flaws before publicly disclosing them.
So JetBrains wanted to have a patch ready before disclosing the vulnerability publicly. It seems they were working on it and were working with Rapid7. I am struggling to think how it would be better for users if an unpatched vulnerability is released before a patch is available. What's the thinking here, that users will take additional precautions to secure the application while they wait for a patch?
> Rapid7 spotted fresh patches for CVE-2024-27198 and CVE-2024-27199 on Monday, without a published security advisory and without telling the researchers.
Rapid7 reported the vulnerabilities mid-Feb. Jetbrains turned around with patches about 2 weeks later, and published them yesterday. The CVE was literally created yesterday. Isn't it a bit premature to claim "silence"?
They released patches without saying they were related to a vulnerability and without notifying Rapid7. That is the textbook definition of what a silent patch is.
I'm not sure how to reword it in another way that would help you understand that Jetbrains did what is called "silent patching".
Maybe this paragraph from the article makes it clear?
>Rapid7 claims that after more than a week of radio silence from JetBrains on the coordinated disclosure matter, Rapid7 spotted fresh patches for CVE-2024-27198 and CVE-2024-27199 on Monday, without a published security advisory and without telling the researchers.
That makes this whole thing fall under Rapid7's silent patching policy.
> Rapid7 says it reported the two TeamCity vulnerabilities in mid-February, claiming JetBrains soon after suggested releasing patches for the flaws before publicly disclosing them.
So JetBrains wanted to have a patch ready before disclosing the vulnerability publicly. It seems they were working on it and were working with Rapid7. I am struggling to think how it would be better for users if an unpatched vulnerability is released before a patch is available. What's the thinking here, that users will take additional precautions to secure the application while they wait for a patch?