[s1k3s]

I've criticized the original article for lack of information here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35698547#35703662

However, this blog post takes it too far:

> It proceeds to not show the contents of this HTTP request because it would show that it's not at all interesting. It does not contain any private data.

You don't know that, nor do you take any steps to actually prove your claim. This blog post is just as bad as the original post for not providing any evidence to your claims.

To add to that: OP seems to summarize the HN comments section without even citing it.

I'm double disappointed :)

[MartijnBraam]

I have not even seen the HN comment section before writing this post