Should nginx' default shipped fastcgi_param file updated to mitigate httpoxy?

[Thomas Deutschmann]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2016-08-10 11:00, Valentin V. Bartenev wrote:
> Why have you decided to patch "fastcgi_params" and left untouched 
> other similar protocols like scgi, uwsgi?

Uhm, good catch. Thanks!

Will update our patch to https://git.io/v6Wp9 (i.e. patch will be
extended to modify {scgi,uwsgi}_params as well).


- -- 
Regards,
Thomas

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.1
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=CWb2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----