Am Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2014, 22:01:35 schrieb Ángel González:
Ángel González wrote:
First of all, note that wget doesn't react to a disconnect with a
downgraded retry thus
it is mainly not vulnerable to poodle (you could only use
CVE-2014-3566 against servers
not supporting TLS).
Hey.
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 19:01 +0200, Tim Rühsen wrote:
Thanks for your input.
We are just discussing that issue (and of course anybody is invited to take
part here on the list).
Sorry, I've only saw that one afterwards :)
While we (developers) could change the code in a few minutes,
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 21:34 +0200, Ángel González wrote:
First of all, note that wget doesn't react to a disconnect with a
downgraded retry thus
it is mainly not vulnerable to poodle (you could only use CVE-2014-3566
against servers
not supporting TLS).
Then, even in that case, as an
Am Freitag, 17. Oktober 2014, 18:02:39 schrieb Christoph Anton Mitterer:
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 21:34 +0200, Ángel González wrote:
First of all, note that wget doesn't react to a disconnect with a
downgraded retry thus
it is mainly not vulnerable to poodle (you could only use CVE-2014-3566
Hi,
I'm working on a Web-in-a-sandbox project, trying to host shallow
(-l 2) copies of several web sites on a server running in a private
Internet replica.
So far, httrack's -K5 option (which they call transparent proxy
URL) appears to do what I need (see
