-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Chris,
On 4/20/13 6:08 PM, chris derham wrote: > I think that you have articulated your suggestion very well. I > think you have weighed the pros well and been open to debate. > Personally I just don't think what you propose will have the effect > that you desire. I agree. Most of these scanners only scan a few URLs every few seconds in order to avoid being branded as vulnerability-scanners, so adding a delay to them won't really change anything. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJRdaj2AAoJEBzwKT+lPKRY/GYP/2N0gjRMkbwiHJBWtRQQUulG h4+/c5hGJLUIGx6FZuxQ9VYEz36bU65PecmMSXsxTx1fjkiVDUCb8j4BtBlZrxX8 rWIe8e/GcPaG0XLKBfzq47tFuIwP5F93faSLNQg8BDR3Db2kgpPj6DGfq1XO4r1a km8GevkCWtCsoSXdYcCyTZcZFZ4YtlJ2gUM7UvTDL8f1Hm+AwTFOuXUXark2Zcsg d2Gz2i7b49Qtr4on9e+iaNLI87NdyOiKBUOK8qM3suDY1+431cHEhPdfNMCtTcKI 3PEf7qZJaM6DqgjOwuwJGJxgNNPiwyfjYusIfYNHTuC5rnUFHpHW4XhbEghsM+Wi qKEbAb6JFXo9RGi4ths6h/1EeN76PX3Kjs9cO0ZnOTvEOEsUuI5siKbxFPskqYMS v4uicF5QmFoVOh1HE7hC2jV1hmpegVGLOmQ+ocpf3ZmDzZPsOkDn9iFtaGBIV51q FVH6WO3voJ484N6vyFGlUOJy3trSOl+QpzWKRJwPIqcRg4+ugriLSOvFV7PgDley ICoBZ+VxQwvjtUVe0DsVPLqfpMnslxELg5hDYoAGQh29nhojUzT/l75+hDBLvXt9 WIqD+8oGnpu6p4/8BJTg4fV122m6pPbc/GEn1VvuCwYk0gad1bxeyIvV4UoB6bUm g+NTExtExQqLKfGsl657 =4chQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
