https://wiki.owasp.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Talk%3AFail_securely 2026-05-02T04:46:02Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.27.2 https://wiki.owasp.org/index.php?title=Talk:Fail_securely&diff=30875&oldid=prev 2008-06-09T15:08:18Z

<p>New page: I&#039;m visiting OWASP for the first time. This comment may apply throughout the site, but this is the first instance I&#039;ve seen. My suggestion: Clearly and systematically distinguish counter...</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>I'm visiting OWASP for the first time. This comment may apply throughout the site, but<br /> this is the first instance I've seen. My suggestion:<br /> <br /> Clearly and systematically distinguish counter-examples (ie, examples that demonstrate<br /> the insecure way of doing things) from good examples. For example, counter-examples<br /> could have a different background color, or at a minimum an obvious comment within the<br /> sample itself stating that this is the WRONG WAY TO DO IT! I don't think it's as <br /> effective to rely on the surrounding text to clearly identify good from bad examples.<br /> <br /> It's not that I think the visitors to this site will generally be idiots, but I think<br /> it greatly improves readability and decreases the likelihood of misunderstanding...<br /> especially if, as the site grows, an article might provide a number of examples of <br /> both the wrong and right way to do things, or if the examples get more lengthy.<br /> <br /> Chris</div>

Flytrap