Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 5, 2024. It is now read-only.

Would you consider backporting #168 to 3.x? #169

Closed
jakubpawlowicz opened this issue Jan 20, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Would you consider backporting #168 to 3.x? #169

jakubpawlowicz opened this issue Jan 20, 2016 · 3 comments
Assignees
@hueniverse
Labels
bug Bug or defect security Issue with security impact
Milestone
3.1.3

Comments

@jakubpawlowicz
Copy link

Some packages (like https://github.com/request/request) are stuck on hawk 3.x because of node.js 4 dependency, and the recently fixed security issue still applies to them. Any chances to see 3.1.3 with backported 0833f99?
@hueniverse
Copy link
Contributor

It doesn't affect request users. These issues are only possible on the server, not the client side of the protocol. If someone else does the work I'll consider it. See #170

@hueniverse hueniverse added bug Bug or defect security Issue with security impact labels Jan 20, 2016
@hueniverse hueniverse added this to the 3.1.3 milestone Jan 21, 2016
@hueniverse hueniverse self-assigned this Jan 21, 2016
@jakubpawlowicz
Copy link
Author

Thanks @hueniverse and @remy!

@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Jan 9, 2020

This thread has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Please open a new issue for related bugs or questions following the new issue template instructions.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 9, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees

@hueniverse hueniverse

Labels
bug Bug or defect security Issue with security impact
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.1.3
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@jakubpawlowicz @hueniverse