3 ms·
I don't understand this. By that logic you could go from HTTP to a new but buggy and flawed HTTPS (when that was in its infancy) and rather than that being cons
by FireBeyond 3y ago
I don't understand this. By that logic you could go from HTTP to a new but buggy and flawed HTTPS (when that was in its infancy) and rather than that being considered a vulnerability, you could say "Well, everyone else is just using HTTP so they deserve a CVE too..."
- teaearlgraycold 3y agoShould we not mark insecure protocols with tremendous numbers of CVEs?
- eberkund 3y agoNo, because the advertised additional security may cause people to do things that they would not otherwise have done had they not falsely believed the security claims on the newer protocol.