On Jun 15, 2019, at 1:55 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
> Perhaps the youth of today think of it as "IO"; if not, I'd go with "I/O".
For what it's worth, a Google search for
"io" "linux"
has "io GNU/Linux" as its first hit, but that's the name of a distribution, so
I'm not sure it counts.
On Jun 15, 2019, at 1:36 PM, Dario Lombardo wrote:
> A user reported a misalignment in the codebase for IO Graphs vs I/O Graphs.
> Indeed there is a mix of the two of them. What should be the correct wording?
I think of it as "I/O", but I'm an old person who remembers hearing about
Hi
A user reported a misalignment in the codebase for IO Graphs vs I/O Graphs.
Indeed there is a mix of the two of them. What should be the correct
wording?
Dario.
--
Naima is online.
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing
On Jun 15, 2019, at 3:07 AM, Dario Lombardo wrote:
> Actually no code for extracting credentials has been added.
...other than code that adds fields with names such as "User name" and
"Password" to the protocol tree, which has been in Wireshark for a while.
> It's a tap that collects them and
Actually no code for extracting credentials has been added. It's a tap that
collects them and shows a table with them. The credentials already exist in
wireshark in clear text.
2 protocols have been instrumented so far, http (basic and header auth) and
ftp.
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 09:57 Tomasz Moń
My $0.02:
> this could lead companies... to deny the use of the program, due to
wrongly identifying Wireshark as a hacking tool.
Wireshark is already a "hacker tool" de facto, regardless of the fact that
it performs passive network analysis. The first two results for "hacker
tools" on Google
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:27 PM Roland Knall wrote:
> There is a patch currently waiting for inclusion. It would allow for
> dissectors to easily make credentials (username/password) available and
> present them in a tool window in Wireshark.
I understand that you mean, that it'd be easy to
