makes it legally OK for Chocolatey to package it than I think most people here are acknowledging.
Chocolately never distributed Fiddler packages. This is just a basic misunderstanding of how Chocolately works.
Chocolately never distributed Fiddler packages. This is just a basic misunderstanding of how Chocolately works.
But in practice, I'm aware of how Chocolatey works, and figured I could get away with pointing out that the US legal system has previously considered access of remote systems to be a crime even in cases of publicly exposed endpoints without having to do a longwinded explanation of the role of Chocolatey vs the end user running Chocolatey's provided scripts.