<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Shellshock on Karpoke - Just Another Blog</title><link>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/tags/shellshock/</link><description>Recent content in Shellshock on Karpoke - Just Another Blog</description><generator>Hugo -- 0.167.0</generator><language>es</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:03:00 +0100</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/tags/shellshock/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Everything you need to know about the Shellshock Bash bug</title><link>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/2014/11/14/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-shellshock-bash-bug/</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:03:00 +0100</pubDate><guid>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/2014/11/14/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-shellshock-bash-bug/</guid><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Remember Heartbleed? If you believe the hype today, Shellshock is in
that league and with an equally awesome name albeit bereft of a cool
logo (someone in the marketing department of these vulns needs to get
on that). But in all seriousness, it does have the potential to be a
biggie and as I did with Heartbleed, I wanted to put together
something definitive both for me to get to grips with the situation
and for others to dissect the hype from the true underlying risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>