wget should work for common use cases.
Such as downloading sources of kernels, gcc and such.
From build scripts, not only by hand.
Without having to modify said scripts.
Your patch breaks that.

I don't care that security people are upset.
They are paranoid, it's part of their profession.
It does not mean everybody else have to be as paranoid.

If you have a patch which adds actual cert checking
and thus does not introduce regressions, please post it.

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 6:38 PM,  <ja...@jirutka.cz> wrote:
>> //config:       If you still think this is unacceptable, send patches.
> That’s exactly what I did.
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2018-May/086444.html
> Jakub
> On 2018-05-26 17:54, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 5:39 PM,  <ja...@jirutka.cz> wrote:
>>>>> That's a crime against security!
>>>> Say what?
>>> That’s a hyperbole. The thing is that when you don’t verify the peer’s
>>> certificate, then you’re vulnerable to MitM attack with fake certificate
>>> injection. The whole SSL/TLS is totally useless in that moment. It’s more
>>> or
>>> less like putting the door’s key under the carpet right in front of the
>>> door.
>>> Allowing to bypass/ignore certificate verification is ok-ish in some
>>> situations, but only when the user do it consciously, using explicit
>>> option
>>> such as --no-check-certificate, not silently as the default option.
>> wget.c:
>> //config:       If you still think this is unacceptable, send patches.
>> //config:
>> //config:       If you still think this is unacceptable, do not want to
>> send
>> //config:       patches, but do want to waste bandwidth explaining how
>> wrong
>> //config:       it is, you will be ignored.
busybox mailing list

Reply via email to