On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:42 PM, dblackshell <backbon...@gmail.com> wrote: > ------------------------ > I understand that this is "any number of characters which are not >", > but... does this make any sense if you put it in front of a ">" like > this "<\W*script[^>]*>" ? > > Are these equivalent? > > <\W*script[^>]*> > > <\W*script.*> > --------------------------------------- > > Yes it does make sense because, using <\W*script.*> you get a greedy regular > expression. I haven't checked the source, but if the response parsing > function parses more than one line (or the html text is one liner) things > could get really buggy. <\W*script.*> will make a similar [0] match, while > <\W*script[^>]*> will make a proper [1] match... > > I would not post on top, but really can't figure out how the email poped up > to you :) > > [0] http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/2276/greedys.jpg > [1] http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/1213/nogreedy.jpg > > >
What about: <\W*script[^>]*> vs. <\W*script.*?> -- Andrés Riancho http://www.bonsai-sec.com/ http://w3af.sourceforge.net/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ W3af-develop mailing list W3af-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/w3af-develop
