Not the fault of security.txt but... Why did we settle on .well_known and not _any other path_? I couldn't think of a worse name. Many better to remember names like .meta come to mind...
-
-
-
That’s an existing RFC standard I think
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
How much spam are orgs seeing sent to the email addresses in security.txt?
-
I haven’t seen any. We had a few beg bounty emails but we told them to go away.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Noooooo! security.txt should’ve been a DNS record. What you’re doing is making people run a webserver even if they weren’t running one on that domain.
-
Oh, wait. They actually updated security.txt spec according to my alternative recommendation and it only applies to website vuln disclosure. Now why are gov being mandated to deploy one for a generic vuln disclosure?
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
RT
@GossiTheDog: Thanks to the fantastic work of the@securitytxt folk, the USG has a draft binding directive requiring gov orgs deploy a v…Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.