New translations en.json (German)

[ci skip]
Signed-off-by: Björn Kimminich <[email protected]>

data/static/i18n/de_DE.json

@@ -342,8 +342,8 @@
 	"There should generally be no good reason to expose server logs through a web URL of the server itself, epecially not when that server is Internet-facing.": "Es sollte im Allgemeinen keinen guten Grund geben, Server-Logs über eine Web-URL des Servers selbst freizugeben, vor allem nicht, wenn dieser Server im Internet steht.",
 	"Among the long list of route mappings, can you spot any that seem responsible for admin-related functionality?": "Kannst du in der langen Liste von Routen-Mappings irgendwelche erkennen, die für Admin-bezogene Funktionalität zuständig zu sein scheinen?",
 	"Luckily the route mappings were originally in alphabetical order before the developers forgot about that rule at some point.": "Glücklicherweise waren die Routen-Mappings ursprünglich in alphabetischer Reihenfolge, bevor die Entwickler diese Regel irgendwann vergessen haben.",
-	"Assuming that the original \"AdminGuard\" provided access control only to admin users, switching to \"LoginGuard\" seems like a downgrade that would give access to any authenticated user.": "Assuming that the original \"AdminGuard\" provided access control only to admin users, switching to \"LoginGuard\" seems like a downgrade that would give access to any authenticated user.",
-	"Obfuscating the path to the administration section does not add any security, even if it wasn't just a trivial Base64 encoding.": "Obfuscating the path to the administration section does not add any security, even if it wasn't just a trivial Base64 encoding.",
+	"Assuming that the original \"AdminGuard\" provided access control only to admin users, switching to \"LoginGuard\" seems like a downgrade that would give access to any authenticated user.": "Unter der Annahme, dass die ursprüngliche \"AdminGuard\" die Zugriffskontrolle nur für Administratoren bereitstellte, erscheint der Wechsel auf \"LoginGuard\" eine Abwertung zu sein, da sie jedem authentifizierten Benutzer Zugriff geben würde.",
+	"Obfuscating the path to the administration section does not add any security, even if it wasn't just a trivial Base64 encoding.": "Die Verschleierung des Pfades zur Administrations-Sektion brächte selbst dann keinerlei Sicherheit, wenn es nicht nur eine triviale Base64-Kodierung wäre.",
 	"This obfuscation attempt is hard to undo by hand but trivial when executed in a JavaScript console. Regardless, obfuscating the route does not add any level of security.": "This obfuscation attempt is hard to undo by hand but trivial when executed in a JavaScript console. Regardless, obfuscating the route does not add any level of security.",
 	"While attempts could be made to limit access to administrative functions of a web shop through access control, it is definitely safer to apply the \"separation of concerns\" pattern more strictly by internally hosting a distinct admin backend application with no Internet exposure.": "While attempts could be made to limit access to administrative functions of a web shop through access control, it is definitely safer to apply the \"separation of concerns\" pattern more strictly by internally hosting a distinct admin backend application with no Internet exposure.",
 	"Can you identify one or more routes which have something to do with file serving?": "Can you identify one or more routes which have something to do with file serving?",