Talk:Computer security

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Computer security article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 365 days

Networking task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Websites (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computer Security (assessed as Top-importance).

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Internet High‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Espionage High‑importance

	Computer security is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 4 July 2023, it was proposed that this article be

Cybersecurity. The result of the discussion

was not moved.

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Article Cleanup

I am planning on fixing grammar and style issues and cleaning up the article in general. If you disagree with with any of the content removal, please let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.250.65.158 (talk • contribs) 13:13, July 17, 2007 (UTC)
Can you be more specific about changes Tonymetz 💬 16:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's an IP post from 17 years ago... i just added a sig so it will archive. Meters (talk) 20:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

Digital security does seem to be a small, long-standing article that is a synonym; it also has some concerns regarding advertising. Readers might therefore best be served by a selective merge and redirect of that other article to here. Klbrain (talk) 10:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Merge seems to be a reasonable suggestion. Is there any difference in definition? Chumpih ^t 12:10, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, clearly a

talk) 14:42, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Merge, this is the same subject. @Klbrain: After a few months and no opposition, I would say that you can be bold and just merge it. PhotographyEdits (talk) 11:51, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain Thank you! PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 July 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The consensus was to create a new category or page for cybersecurity than move the current one. (non-admin closure) Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 12:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME by a wide margin. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:54, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Unfortunately, "cybersecurity" encompasses computer security and

talk) 11:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

If you wish to do that, then by all means. However, this article refers to itself as "cybersecurity" in the lede. Therefore, something is clearly being mixed-up here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Better to make
Cybersecurity a disambig or broad-concept article referencing Computer security and Network security
.

~Kvng (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - While it is absolutely true that "cybersecurity" and "computer security" are two different things, this article is currently an awkward amalgamation of both concepts. I think the cybersecurity aspects of the article need to be split out and moved to a broad-concept article called
Cybersecurity and the Computer security article's focus remains on actual computer security. - Aoidh (talk) 17:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Split per Aoidh and Kvng; create a new article at
cybersecurity -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 00:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Add my name to those in favour of split. --
talk) 08:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Information as unreliable

I feel Computer Security in using Wikipedia is unreliable. With a breach of IBM in Colorado healthcare due to some CLOP ransomware gang in Russia. Could be the Shadowcrew again involving hackers Russian and Cuban like Albert Gonzalez. People who developed database management and IBM software are being targeted as individuals as being the problem is wrong to do. INFORMATION gets proliferated more as a weapon of mass destruction. They have terrorists and serial killer Biographic data on wikipedia and this is why threats exist. Terrorists using Wikipedia as advantage. 65.163.112.196 (talk) 12:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Security through obscurity#Criticism.

Everything on Wikipedia is (or at least should be) based on publicly available sources, available to anyone and everyone. Perhaps you are thinking of

Wikileaks? (which has no connection with Wikipedia). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:06, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Create new article for cybersecurity

I suggest creating a new article to separate cybersecurity form computer security, the justification and explanation of why it is different is in the suggested article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cybersecurity

But in summary, both concepts can be improved having separate articles for

cybersecurity, because cybersecurity includes the protection of elements and processes which are not technology but depend on technology, as society depends more and more on technology. Pcoronaf (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Changing order and prioritising the general public

Hi everyone. I've recently been contracted to do some editing work on Wikipedia articles, and this is one of the articles my employers would like improving.

(TLDR; I'm trying to make the article easier and more accessible for the general public to help improve their own computer security, so some topics may be moved around.)

I've recently completely some research for my master's degree on making Wikipedia more easy to understand and readable. The research includes surveying over 500 members of the general public on their responses to climate change articles on Wikipedia. The results suggest that both readability scores on Wikipedia are detrimental to people's understanding of the information, and in some cases can lead to people mistrusting the information. I'm looking to implement some of these findings into this article - in short, improve the readability of certain sections.

As well as readability, I also want to better prioritise information which suits the general public. Both the order of the article and the way advice is discussed on this article is slightly counterintuitive to aiding the general public on increasing their knowledge about computer security. Although computer security is a broad topic, topics that are within the realm of control or importance to the general public are mainly limited to protection and safety. This isn't prioritised in this article and is hidden amongst various subsections.

Over the next few weeks I will test moving some things around in the article with the goal of making the article more productive and easy to navigate for the general public. I hope to maintain the overall tone and information of the article, but simultaneously make it more helpful for the general public.

Please be free to comment on any of my edits if you believe it is changing the article in any way that you see unfit, and I would be more than happy to discuss your comments. Theobrad (talk) 11:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of 'Importance of Cyber Security' section

In the vein of condensing the article: keeping the information concise and in the right section, I believe this section (which is currently at the bottom of the article) may be slightly redundant following the rest of the information. With all respect to the author, as the section nicely summarises some of the points, unless it is placed high and condensed a bit as a kind of "summary" of issues, I don't think it should remain on its own at the bottom.

Would love to hear people's thoughts.

As much of it is reiterated elsewhere, should it be removed?
Or should it stay and be put higher up. I believe the article could do with more clear language (as this uses) and more straightforward explanations of things for the general public.

Theobrad (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remove that section. It violates

Wikpedia's style guide in several ways and was added by a blocked user. —Dexxor (talk) 12:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

In that case, you might have removed yourself (as I have just done). See

WP:BMB, revert all contributions by blocked editors, good or bad. (But, in response to Theobrad, yes it was redundant.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks you all for your help! Please feel free to give input on any edits I make it the future! Theobrad (talk) 09:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well you can just

WP:Bold, revert, discuss cycle. My generally approach is only to use the talk page for proposals that might be controversial as it is usually easier to negotiate through a difficult issue there. But you often have to propose a draft anyway, just to be clear what the the proposal is. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply

]