-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 150
CVE-2013-3302 and CVE-2016-8630 #206
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
CVE-2013-3302 and CVE-2016-8630 #206
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought this was very good! 🎉 Compared to the others I reviewed, I feel you did a better job at actually distilling the jargon for readers. You explained things better instead of just providing technical facts/garbage, but your clarity could be improved.
Hopefully I was not too harsh. While I did not review everything for perfect accuracy, if I did not comment on something I most likely think it is fine.
I have requested some changes and provided some thoughts. You do not have to accept all of my suggestions and comments. I only ask that you take them into consideration.
Additional Notes
I think the description and mistakes answer are the most important for readers. The description explains what the CVE actually is, and the mistake answer explains why it happened and how not to have it happen to you. Take some extra time to craft those notes and improve your readability/clarity.
- Try to improve your readability/clarity across the board. Some of your notes don't flow very well.
- Is
ssocketintentional? If not make sure to find and fix all instances, I didn't flag them all. #206 (comment) - In the future, try to maintain a "clean" git history. (Only change what is necessary.) #206 (comment)
Again, I can be harsh. Honestly, good work!
No description provided.