Security Advisor notice of kernel upgrade available
Hi,
I'm currently running cPanel in AWS
The system notified me like normal that there were kernel updates available and that I should reboot.
It went from 5.13 to 5.15 after running
. This went through as expected with no issues. However, the notice in Security Advisor doesn't go away after the update is completed. As shown in the photo below, it appear that security advisor is maybe expecting a different package (apologies if that's the wrong term.) I can run the command again after rebooting and get this.
apt -y upgrade
. This went through as expected with no issues. However, the notice in Security Advisor doesn't go away after the update is completed. As shown in the photo below, it appear that security advisor is maybe expecting a different package (apologies if that's the wrong term.) I can run the command again after rebooting and get this.
-
Hey there! Could you submit a ticket to our support team about this particular issue? I'm not seeing any open cases about Ubuntu's Security Advisor at this time, so this could be something new we need to address. 0 -
Hey there! Could you submit a ticket to our support team about this particular issue? I'm not seeing any open cases about Ubuntu's Security Advisor at this time, so this could be something new we need to address.
So I did submit a ticket (#94471509 ), was advised that the issue was being tracked under CPANEL-41110 and told the issue would be fixed in 106. I'm at 108 now and it's still giving me the same message like it's looking comparing versions against the wrong source. As far as I can tell it isn't affecting anything else, however, the daily addition to our ticket queue for something we can't fix ourselves isn't exactly the best experience. I realize I can disable the notifications to keep it out of the ticket queue but I'd rather a solution than a workaround. Do I have to make a brand new ticket and start over to fix this?0 -
Hey there! Honestly, a ticket would be best so we could confirm the behavior and see if this is an issue that somehow either changed or didn't get applied to version 108. I know that isn't an ideal answer, but seeing the issue in action will let our developers confirm the behavior. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
3 comments