typo: Double word "that" (#2366)

Author: nschonni

locale/en/blog/vulnerability/openssl-march-2016.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ author: Rod Vagg
 
 ***(Updates to this post, including a schedule change are included below)***
 
-The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-February/000063.html) that that they will be releasing versions 1.0.2g and 1.0.1s this week, on **Tuesday the 1st of March, UTC**. The releases will fix _"several defects"_ that are labelled as _"high"_ severity under their security policy, meaning they are:
+The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-February/000063.html) that they will be releasing versions 1.0.2g and 1.0.1s this week, on **Tuesday the 1st of March, UTC**. The releases will fix _"several defects"_ that are labelled as _"high"_ severity under their security policy, meaning they are:
 
 > ... issues that are of a lower risk than critical, perhaps due to affecting less common configurations, or which are less likely to be exploitable.
 

locale/en/blog/vulnerability/openssl-may-2016.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ The following releases have been made available to include the security updates
 
 ***Original post is included below, along with an update containing a risk assessment***
 
-The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-April/000069.html) that that they will be releasing versions 1.0.1t and 1.0.2h this week, on **Tuesday the 3rd of May, UTC**. The releases will fix _"several security defects"_ that are labelled as _"high"_ severity under their security policy, meaning they are:
+The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2016-April/000069.html) that they will be releasing versions 1.0.1t and 1.0.2h this week, on **Tuesday the 3rd of May, UTC**. The releases will fix _"several security defects"_ that are labelled as _"high"_ severity under their security policy, meaning they are:
 
 > ... issues that are of a lower risk than critical, perhaps due to affecting less common configurations, or which are less likely to be exploitable.
 

locale/en/blog/vulnerability/openssl-november-2017.md

@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ We will include an update here once all releases are made available.
 
 --------------------------------------
 
-The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2017-October/000103.html) _(also see their [correction](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2017-October/000104.html))_ that that they will be releasing versions 1.1.0g and 1.0.2m this week, on **Thursday the 2nd of November 2017, UTC**. The releases will fix one _"low severity security issue"_ and one _"moderate level security issue"_. "Moderate" level security issues for OpenSSL:
+The OpenSSL project has [announced](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2017-October/000103.html) _(also see their [correction](https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2017-October/000104.html))_ that they will be releasing versions 1.1.0g and 1.0.2m this week, on **Thursday the 2nd of November 2017, UTC**. The releases will fix one _"low severity security issue"_ and one _"moderate level security issue"_. "Moderate" level security issues for OpenSSL:
 
 > ... includes issues like crashes in client applications, flaws in protocols that are less commonly used (such as DTLS), and local flaws.
 

locale/en/blog/vulnerability/september-2016-security-releases.md

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ All versions of Node.js are **affected**.
 
 ### CVE-2016-5325: `reason` argument in `ServerResponse#writeHead()` not properly validated
 
-This is a low severity security defect that that may make [HTTP response splitting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_response_splitting) possible under certain circumstances. If user-input is passed to the `reason` argument to `writeHead()` on an HTTP response, a new-line character may be used to inject additional responses.
+This is a low severity security defect that may make [HTTP response splitting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_response_splitting) possible under certain circumstances. If user-input is passed to the `reason` argument to `writeHead()` on an HTTP response, a new-line character may be used to inject additional responses.
 
 The fix for this defect introduces a new case where `throw` may occur when configuring HTTP responses. Users should already be adopting try/catch here.