[wp-hackers] wp-hackers Digest, Vol 109, Issue 25

Shane Thompson prog.support at webwizards.com.au
Thu Feb 20 02:13:15 UTC 2014 

Harry,

It seems you've created quite the stir, so let me try and put it in
perspective for you.
If someone walked into your building and started tearing out wall sockets
and checking your electrical wiring then walked up to you and handed you a
sheet of paper saying you failed an electrical inspection, wouldn't you
want to know this person is a qualified electrician?

I agree that we do need something like this, transparent reviews on such
things. However if it isn't making you money, then maybe for now the best
thing to do would be to actually not do these reviews as you lose money on
them. I realise you said that you don't want that kind of advice but it is
what I will give.

I had a quick look at your review of the PODS plugin, as any user would,
without going too far in depth and it looked like a dangerous plugin from
your review. Then I had a look at the github response, and thought "Maybe
it's not that bad". Without having done my own review I can not be certain
any more, is this the kind of response you want? Uncertainty? Who should I
trust? Why should I trust you over the plugin developer? It comes back to
qualifications.

Also, my understanding is you submit such reviews without letting anyone
know. If you wish to improve your current system, you should have some
method of contacting the plugin developers to at least let them know of the
review. If someone was secretly going around telling people not to do
business with you because you don't use recycled plastic in your printers
(or something equally as ridiculous), you'd want to know, surely.

As for your point of requiring payment for a review... Most WordPress
plugins are released open source. As such, the developer makes no money off
it. They invest their time in it for no gains, to find someone has
published a "light-touch" review saying it is dangerous. They will have to
spend their own money, after giving up their own time to have this
re-reviewed (if that's even a word), in the hopes they will have a better
review.

Also, what are you doing to ensure the reviews are not biased to your
programmer? It's very easy to be biased in any circumstance, even in your
profession. When I was in school, my Computer Science teacher did this one
thing to ensure that he was not being biased - instead of writing our names
on our tests, we would write our birth-date. Essentially it came back that
he was not being biased, which is great. But what are you and your
organisation doing to ensure there's no bias in these reviews? Google does
something with their code where it must be submitted for review, and
reviewed by 2 people before it is committed to the code-base. Maybe
something similar could work for you?

Having said all that... If you could address all these issues and make your
reviews transparent, as others have said, and fix these few other issues,
this could be quite a handy resource. However if you are unable to fix this
due to it not being commercially viable to do so, it might be best to
"suspend" the service until such time you can afford to fix it.

If your car is not road-worthy, do you keep driving it until you can afford
to fix it? No, because it is dangerous to do so. So why would you do it
with a service like this?

My advice would be:
1. Set up a standard for these reviews. It needs to be open to criticism.
2. Make it clear that such reviews are simply advisory and are not to be
taken as anything otherwise.
3. Your guys need some credibility. Someone said third-party
certification...
4. There needs to be a way for developers to get back to you, and you
should contact the developers to let them know of the review.
5. Your reviews also should be open to comments, perhaps others could share
their opinions. This would obviously have to be moderated (refer to Chris's
comment on mud fights).
6. You also need to ensure the reviews are not biased.

I realise that doing something out of your own pocket is hard, and quite
respectable when it is for the benefit of others. However unless these can
be fixed you might actually be doing the opposite of what you intend.

Best Regards.



On 20 February 2014 07:50, <wp-hackers-request at lists.automattic.com> wrote:

> Send wp-hackers mailing list submissions to
>         wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         wp-hackers-request at lists.automattic.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         wp-hackers-owner at lists.automattic.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of wp-hackers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Harry Metcalfe)
>    2. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Eric Hendrix)
>    3. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Madalin Ignisca)
>    4. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Harry Metcalfe)
>    5. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Madalin Ignisca)
>    6. Re: Fwd: [GSoC - 2014] Introducing Myself (Ian Dunn)
>    7. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Harry Metcalfe)
>    8. Re: WordPress plugin inspections (Harry Metcalfe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 22:22:38 +0000
> From: Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID: <53052EAE.5040208 at dxw.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 19/02/2014 22:15, Peter van der Does wrote:
> > snip snip
> >
> > Does the end user really care how the code is written?
> > The grade depends on the expertise of the testers. What makes them
> > qualified to give this grade? Do they have a PHP certification, what's
> > their background?
> >
> The really key part of this criterion is:
> > The lack of good style must materially reduce the tester's ability to
> > understand what the code is doing, thereby indicating that the lack of
> > good style has reduced code readability and maintainability.
> This isn't about aesthetics - code that is written in such a way that it
> is very difficult to follow is also harder to maintain. It's more likely
> to contain bugs, some of which may be vulnerabilities. And it's much
> easier to make mistakes when editing it after you haven't looked at it
> for a while. It's also evidence that the developer may be inexperienced.
> These are all important factors. That said, I can't imagine that a
> plugin would fail an inspection on this criterion alone.
>
> The inspections are carried out by experienced developers. I can
> appreciate that that might not be clear at the moment. I'm not sure how
> we'd go about reassuring people on that front, though: what would you
> consider to be good evidence that we're knowledgeable?
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:25:44 -0800 (PST)
> From: "Eric Hendrix" <hendronix at gmail.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID: <1392848743179.ae6cbe39 at Nodemailer>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Certifications.??
> Eric A. Hendrix
> hendronix at gmail.com
> 910-644-8940
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
>
> > On 19/02/2014 22:15, Peter van der Does wrote:
> >> snip snip
> >>
> >> Does the end user really care how the code is written?
> >> The grade depends on the expertise of the testers. What makes them
> >> qualified to give this grade? Do they have a PHP certification, what's
> >> their background?
> >>
> > The really key part of this criterion is:
> >> The lack of good style must materially reduce the tester's ability to
> >> understand what the code is doing, thereby indicating that the lack of
> >> good style has reduced code readability and maintainability.
> > This isn't about aesthetics - code that is written in such a way that it
> > is very difficult to follow is also harder to maintain. It's more likely
> > to contain bugs, some of which may be vulnerabilities. And it's much
> > easier to make mistakes when editing it after you haven't looked at it
> > for a while. It's also evidence that the developer may be inexperienced.
> > These are all important factors. That said, I can't imagine that a
> > plugin would fail an inspection on this criterion alone.
> > The inspections are carried out by experienced developers. I can
> > appreciate that that might not be clear at the moment. I'm not sure how
> > we'd go about reassuring people on that front, though: what would you
> > consider to be good evidence that we're knowledgeable?
> > Harry
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:27:13 +0200
> From: Madalin Ignisca <madalin.ignisca at gmail.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID:
>         <CAOztgazyCNP_AWYYF+JmnkWCqHUswDNC8o2=
> yO+03uABKkWxXg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Certification of PHP from a trusted 3rd party source like Zend or similar
> company.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Eric Hendrix <hendronix at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Certifications. ?
> > Eric A. Hendrix
> > hendronix at gmail.com
> > 910-644-8940
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 19/02/2014 22:15, Peter van der Does wrote:
> > >> snip snip
> > >>
> > >> Does the end user really care how the code is written?
> > >> The grade depends on the expertise of the testers. What makes them
> > >> qualified to give this grade? Do they have a PHP certification, what's
> > >> their background?
> > >>
> > > The really key part of this criterion is:
> > >> The lack of good style must materially reduce the tester's ability to
> > >> understand what the code is doing, thereby indicating that the lack of
> > >> good style has reduced code readability and maintainability.
> > > This isn't about aesthetics - code that is written in such a way that
> it
> > > is very difficult to follow is also harder to maintain. It's more
> likely
> > > to contain bugs, some of which may be vulnerabilities. And it's much
> > > easier to make mistakes when editing it after you haven't looked at it
> > > for a while. It's also evidence that the developer may be
> inexperienced.
> > > These are all important factors. That said, I can't imagine that a
> > > plugin would fail an inspection on this criterion alone.
> > > The inspections are carried out by experienced developers. I can
> > > appreciate that that might not be clear at the moment. I'm not sure how
> > > we'd go about reassuring people on that front, though: what would you
> > > consider to be good evidence that we're knowledgeable?
> > > Harry
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > wp-hackers mailing list
> > > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Madalin Ignisca*
> *web developer*
> http://imadalin.ro/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 22:30:12 +0000
> From: Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID: <53053074.3050308 at dxw.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi Eric, Madalin,
>
> That seems reasonable. For the moment - since this is not a service that
> makes us any money at all - I think that it's probably not a practical
> option. But I will keep it in mind.
>
> You might perhaps draw some comfort from the advisories section. All of
> these specific vulnerabilities have been identified by the same testers
> that carry out inspections, have been responsibly disclosed and fixed by
> the relevant developers.
>
> Harry
>
>
> On 19/02/2014 22:25, Eric Hendrix wrote:
> > Certifications. ?
> > Eric A. Hendrix
> > hendronix at gmail.com
> > 910-644-8940
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 19/02/2014 22:15, Peter van der Does wrote:
> >>> snip snip
> >>>
> >>> Does the end user really care how the code is written?
> >>> The grade depends on the expertise of the testers. What makes them
> >>> qualified to give this grade? Do they have a PHP certification, what's
> >>> their background?
> >>>
> >> The really key part of this criterion is:
> >>> The lack of good style must materially reduce the tester's ability to
> >>> understand what the code is doing, thereby indicating that the lack of
> >>> good style has reduced code readability and maintainability.
> >> This isn't about aesthetics - code that is written in such a way that it
> >> is very difficult to follow is also harder to maintain. It's more likely
> >> to contain bugs, some of which may be vulnerabilities. And it's much
> >> easier to make mistakes when editing it after you haven't looked at it
> >> for a while. It's also evidence that the developer may be inexperienced.
> >> These are all important factors. That said, I can't imagine that a
> >> plugin would fail an inspection on this criterion alone.
> >> The inspections are carried out by experienced developers. I can
> >> appreciate that that might not be clear at the moment. I'm not sure how
> >> we'd go about reassuring people on that front, though: what would you
> >> consider to be good evidence that we're knowledgeable?
> >> Harry
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wp-hackers mailing list
> >> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:02:25 +0200
> From: Madalin Ignisca <madalin.ignisca at gmail.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAOztgazNxDnx3Q2jfFsEx_t_D90vjzxxkURBwC5RRE9CpF2cuw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hi Harry,
>
> I agree with your idea with the reviews on dxw.com, but as Eric mentioned,
> you need some certifications to become an authority and trusted in this.
>
> If not, this will just cause just a dispute and fight on each side.
>
> My personal opinion, I would not trust 100% your reviews as you "green"
> some plugins I'd run away from and "red/yellow" a few that really need a
> more relevant review, but you have some good points on a few "red" labeled.
>
> Mentioning here on almost all your responses about this service doesn't
> makes you money it's pointless, you should be proud that you want to
> contribute to the WordPress community and stop complaining about money. If
> you want only money, then I suggest you review more on "premium" stuff, as
> WordPress.org has a team of members that do reviews and
> approve/disapproving plugins and themes and in WordPress.org case we should
> have a really nice chat about how we can improve this service so plugins
> and themes that would not respect all standards we vote for should be
> excluded until corrected as should.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Eric, Madalin,
> >
> > That seems reasonable. For the moment - since this is not a service that
> > makes us any money at all - I think that it's probably not a practical
> > option. But I will keep it in mind.
> >
> > You might perhaps draw some comfort from the advisories section. All of
> > these specific vulnerabilities have been identified by the same testers
> > that carry out inspections, have been responsibly disclosed and fixed by
> > the relevant developers.
> >
> > Harry
> >
> >
> >
> > On 19/02/2014 22:25, Eric Hendrix wrote:
> >
> >> Certifications. ?
> >> Eric A. Hendrix
> >> hendronix at gmail.com
> >> 910-644-8940
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>  On 19/02/2014 22:15, Peter van der Does wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> snip snip
> >>>>
> >>>> Does the end user really care how the code is written?
> >>>> The grade depends on the expertise of the testers. What makes them
> >>>> qualified to give this grade? Do they have a PHP certification, what's
> >>>> their background?
> >>>>
> >>>>  The really key part of this criterion is:
> >>>
> >>>> The lack of good style must materially reduce the tester's ability to
> >>>> understand what the code is doing, thereby indicating that the lack of
> >>>> good style has reduced code readability and maintainability.
> >>>>
> >>> This isn't about aesthetics - code that is written in such a way that
> it
> >>> is very difficult to follow is also harder to maintain. It's more
> likely
> >>> to contain bugs, some of which may be vulnerabilities. And it's much
> >>> easier to make mistakes when editing it after you haven't looked at it
> >>> for a while. It's also evidence that the developer may be
> inexperienced.
> >>> These are all important factors. That said, I can't imagine that a
> >>> plugin would fail an inspection on this criterion alone.
> >>> The inspections are carried out by experienced developers. I can
> >>> appreciate that that might not be clear at the moment. I'm not sure how
> >>> we'd go about reassuring people on that front, though: what would you
> >>> consider to be good evidence that we're knowledgeable?
> >>> Harry
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> wp-hackers mailing list
> >>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wp-hackers mailing list
> >> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Madalin Ignisca*
> *web developer*
> http://imadalin.ro/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:40:37 -0800
> From: Ian Dunn <ian at iandunn.name>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] Fwd: [GSoC - 2014] Introducing Myself
> Message-ID: <530540F5.10305 at iandunn.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 2/13/14, 11:41 PM, Deven Bansod wrote:
> > 1. A *Settings Page* where you will design the Form through a user
> friendly
> > interface like what we use while designing forms using Google Forms.
> (*Please
> > suggest if this will be possible to make in the Required Duration* ).
>
> That's the basic idea, yeah. It would actually be a custom post rather
> than a Settings page, though.
>
>
> > 2. The Settings page UI, thus, will be used to make new *Forms with an
> > unique ID*.
> >
> > 3. The Plugin will have a function to generate *a short code* which will
> > have *arguments like the Form ID* etc.
> >
> > 4. The user can just go to the *'page/post'* that he wants to add the
> > survey and *use the Short Code with the right ID *as an argument and get
> > the survey running. !
>
> Yeah, that's all correct. There'll also be some features specific to
> WordCamp.org, like supporting pre-defined base forms that organizers can
> customize. For instance, a "Call for Speakers" form that potential
> WordCamp speakers can fill out. It would have some standard fields like
> Name, E-mail Address, WordPress.org username, etc, but then the
> organizers could also add their custom questions to the form.
>
> Another feature we're thinking about is having the results of certain
> forms automatically populate some of our other custom post types. For
> example, when someone fills out the Call for Speakers form, it could
> automatically create a drafted Speaker post, so that the organizers
> don't have to copy/paste the data between the two.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 23:45:06 +0000
> From: Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID: <53054202.7010902 at dxw.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
>
> On 19/02/2014 23:02, Madalin Ignisca wrote:
> > Hi Harry,
> >
> > I agree with your idea with the reviews on dxw.com, but as Eric
> mentioned,
> > you need some certifications to become an authority and trusted in this.
> >
> > If not, this will just cause just a dispute and fight on each side.
> >
> That's fair comment. I suppose we'll just have to see. Of course, people
> are free not to use the site!
> > My personal opinion, I would not trust 100% your reviews as you "green"
> > some plugins I'd run away from and "red/yellow" a few that really need a
> > more relevant review, but you have some good points on a few "red"
> labeled.
> Good. That's exactly how it's supposed to work!
>
> > Mentioning here on almost all your responses about this service doesn't
> > makes you money it's pointless, you should be proud that you want to
> > contribute to the WordPress community and stop complaining about money.
> Sorry if I've come across as complaining. I'm not, at all. We are doing
> this in order to contribute to the community - if we didn't care, we
> wouldn't have bothered. I hope the site may make some money one day but
> that is not it's main motivation.
> > If you want only money, then I suggest you review more on "premium"
> stuff, as
> > WordPress.org has a team of members that do reviews and
> > approve/disapproving plugins and themes and in WordPress.org case we
> should
> > have a really nice chat about how we can improve this service so plugins
> > and themes that would not respect all standards we vote for should be
> > excluded until corrected as should.
> I'm all for that. I think there's room for both! And up for a nice chat
> any time :)
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 23:50:10 +0000
> From: Harry Metcalfe <harry at dxw.com>
> To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> Message-ID: <53054332.4070507 at dxw.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi Josh,
>
> There's a good thread going on Github.
>
> H
>
>
> On 19/02/2014 20:38, Josh Pollock wrote:
> > Jamie-
> >
> > The ability to easily do an independent security review of open source
> > software, is one of the strengths of the open source model. But
> publishing
> > vague results, and not contacting the developer, and/ or
> > security at wordpress.org, with any concrete details of a threat doesn't
> help
> > the developer, the community or the users. If anyone can identify a
> > specific security threat in Pods, please email Scott at pods.io and we will
> > address it, like any other responsible developer would.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Josh
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Jamie Currie <jamie at wunderdojo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I had the exact opposite reaction to Chris Williams. Literally a week
> ago
> >> I was talking to someone about the need for more rigorous evaluation of
> >> plugins. I find that I now use only a small handful of plugins that I
> have
> >> extensive experience with because of the lack of any quality standard.
> >>
> >> If that sounds a bit harsh, I'd suggest enabling DEBUG and mysql slow
> >> query (at something like 1 second) and then test out various plugins.
> And
> >> that's just the blatantly obvious stuff. I won't point fingers, but I
> >> recently had issues with one pretty popular plugin and when I went into
> the
> >> code to poke around I found that it is fundamentally flawed in the
> design
> >> -- so much so that I rewrote it and will be sending the author the new
> code
> >> and explanation.
> >>
> >> I understand that a cursory review is subjective and prone to
> >> misstatements, but it's at least a step in the right direction. Perhaps
> the
> >> next step would be for Harry to formalize some kind of process for
> >> responding to / contesting reviews and to encourage community
> involvement
> >> (maybe via this list) to "review the reviews" if you will. I'd be happy
> to
> >> get involved in a process like that if the end result were a base of
> >> plugins that had been scrutinized by some of the WP brains on this list.
> >>
> >> And if, at the end of the day, he harnesses that power to help build a
> >> business, I don't see anything wrong with that either. I think 99% of us
> >> are using WP to make money and it seems to me like he's identified a
> clear
> >> need and at least attempted to address it -- which is pretty much the
> story
> >> of every successful business.
> >>
> >> Jamie Currie
> >> Founder / CEO
> >> wunderdojo
> >> wunderdojo.com
> >> tel: 949-734-0758
> >> 1840 Park Newport, #409
> >> Newport Beach, CA 92660
> >> Master web & app developers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------ Original Message ------
> >> From: "Chris Williams" <chris at clwill.com>
> >> To: "wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com" <wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com>
> >> Sent: 2/19/2014 12:17:17 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] WordPress plugin inspections
> >>
> >>> I certainly can't speak for others, but I would venture to say that
> your
> >>> business model is evil at best. You do fly-by character assassination
> >>> (oops, I mean "light-touch inspections"), based on personal bias ("this
> >>> plugin is large"), and then broadly publish the results as if they are
> >>> somehow authoritative. Worse yet, you then hold plugin developers at
> >>> ransom for changing the review: "If you would like to commission us to
> >>> inspect or review the latest version, please contact us."
> >>>
> >>> How this is of value to anyone, and how you sleep at night with this
> >>> specious business model, is completely beyond me.
> >>>
> >>> On 2/19/14 10:43 AM, "Harry Metcalfe" <harry at dxw.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   Hello list,
> >>>> We write and publish light-touch inspections of WordPress plugins that
> >>>> we do for our clients. They are just a guide - we conduct some basic
> >>>> checks, not a thorough review.
> >>>>
> >>>> Would plugins which fail this inspection be of general interest to the
> >>>> list and therefore worth posting? Is the list also interested in
> >>>> vulnerability advisories, or do people tend to get those elsewhere?
> >>>>
> >>>> Here's an example report:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://security.dxw.com/plugins/pods-custom-content-types-and-fields/
> >>>>
> >>>> Grateful for a steer...
> >>>>
> >>>> Harry
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Harry Metcalfe
> >>>> 07790 559 876
> >>>> @harrym
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> wp-hackers mailing list
> >>>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >>>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> wp-hackers mailing list
> >>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wp-hackers mailing list
> >> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> >> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of wp-hackers Digest, Vol 109, Issue 25
> *******************************************
>



-- 
*Kind Regards*
Shane Thompson

T - 08 9350 9392
F - 08 9356 6168
E - prog.support at webwizards.com.au
W - www.webwizards.com.au

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list