Ha, these articles always use xss.as instead of exploit.in, despite the latter being vastly more popular and appropriate, because exploit.in charges $100 for membership.
I sympathize because, who wants to shell out $100. But even big name news outlets all use xss.in, you see it everywhere, precisely because it's free and anyone can join. Nothing wrong with using it really, just something amusing I've noticed
I sympathize because, who wants to shell out $100. But even big name news outlets all use xss.in, you see it everywhere, precisely because it's free and anyone can join. Nothing wrong with using it really, just something amusing I've noticed