Thanks for the info! That's very interesting since they usually only provide out-of-cycle critical fixes for their paid tiers. On the other hand - this only proves that it's actually possible to provide a hot-fixed OpenJDK in time.
Unfortunately, I assume that a very common case is just using the distribution provided openjdk-package and configuring the system for auto updates. So the main issue here is that a serious number of systems is relying on the patch process of the distribution to fix issues like this and they are still vulnerable at this moment.
I can see how this would have helped in this case.
As I see it, the distributions are mostly relying on the upstream provisioning of the openJDK project. So if they fix this issue, it shouldn't take long until we see updated packages in all major distributions. This might be a problem specific to the openJDK build process, so a different package source would help in that case.
But as mentioned above, Azul usually doesn't provide out-of-cycle critical fixes without a paid plan. And most people will still use whatever the distribution provides - so this is still an issue regardless of alternative package sources.
And since I assume that many or most running JDK instances actually are coming from the distributions repository rather than an alternative source, and there is literally no outcry regarding the missing packages whatsoever - I fear that there are a lot of vulnerable software systems of people not knowing about it right now.
