Proofreading fixes 0x05d part 3

[Laancelot]

Typos, poor English, links

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request to the OWASP MASTG. Please make sure that:

• Your contribution is written in the 2nd person (e.g. you)
• Your contribution is written in an active present form for as much as possible.
• You have made sure that the reference section is up to date (e.g. please add sources you have used, make sure that the references to MITRE/MASVS/etc. are up to date)
• Your contribution has proper formatted markdown and/or code
• Any references to website have been formatted as [TEXT](URL “NAME”)
• You verified/tested the effectiveness of your contribution (e.g.: is the code really an effective remediation? Please verify it works!)

If your PR is related to an issue. Please end your PR test with the following line:
This PR closes #< insert number here >.

[Laancelot]

What do you want to say here??
"In such scenario, the same can be easily bypassed by tampering the application, method hooking, etc."

[cpholguera]

I agree that this is not clear at all. I would assume that whoever wow this was trying to say something like "it's important to check whether the key attestation is implemented entirely on the client side (i.e., within the application itself), because if it is, then it can be more easily bypassed by attackers". The recommendation would be to implement the server side counterpart as well.

[Laancelot]

Thanks @cpholguera. Let's have a go at it then.

[cpholguera]

Feel free to change it more. Maybe use some text from my comment. I feel the current version is still missing something :/

[cpholguera]

Thanks @Laancelot and sorry for the delay!