tristanlatr

Hi, I think this fixes #242 ! It would be great to have it merged :) EDIT: After installing the patch: It does NOT fix my issue

Thanks a lot @shaunpud !

It looks like there is less results with the updated technologies.json `--update` argument than without. I think this is linked to #63 . Also I'm not sure about the performance?...

> The update is going to be much slower considering it needs to iterate over 27 individual files now. I'm not talking about the update itself, but the analysis process,...

I'm working on fixing #63, then I'll look into merging this pull request. If it's the JSON loading that is taking so much time, we could think of adopting https://github.com/ijl/orjson...

I’ll look at fixing this issue and publish new version in the coming weeks

I don't think we can do anything about that... We are using the original Wappalyzer `technologies.json` file, I think the issue comes from there.

Hi @chorsley, I agree that automated publishing is a security risk because what you’ve explained, the same risk is present when people install wappalyzer from sources, though. I don’t want...

Hello, Thanks for the report.

> If I scan https://foo/bar/baz burpa will add https://foo/bar/ to the target scope. However, if the redirect is to https://foo/ this will be out of scope. This is by design,...