Talk:Basic Wiki Content and Editor Policies

Please use this space to discuss the basic scope and purpose of the wiki

Format

Please add more questions to the appropriate section, and add your thoughts and comments under each question.

For the purposes of this Discussion page only, questions do not need to be signed - only answers and comments.

Questions

General

• How is the information on the wiki different from the information on Wikipedia?
  • Mostly just most pages on here don't meet the standards of notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Also we'd especially like to include any statements or textfiles published by the hackers, and any technical information about how the hack was performed. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Editor conduct

• Do Conflicts Of Interest (COI) prevent users from editing a page?
  • If not, should editors disclose their COI?
    • If so, how to do this while maintaining OPSEC?
• How should the community handle people using the wiki for self-promotion?
• How should the community handle people using the wiki to attack or defame others?
  • I think it's fine for people to edit pages about hacks they took part in and they shouldn't have to disclose it for obvious opsec reasons. If someone is using it to attack or defame others or for excessive self-promotion then we'll warn or block the user. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Content

• How are hacks attributed when they aren't claimed at the time, but attribution is later claimed?
• How are hacks attributed when they aren't claimed at the time, but alleged attribution is later given by a third party?
  • How are hacks attributed when they aren't claimed at the time, but alleged attribution is later given by a third party - and denied by the alleged hacker?
  • If there's conflicting claims I think we can just include both Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• If a hack is just a dox, should it be included with the wiki?
  • no Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• If attribution isn't widely known or accepted, should it be listed on the wiki?
  • If there's something public you can cite to back it Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Do defacements count as hacks for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
  • We don't really want to have articles about every defacement on zone-h, but I think we can include defacements if it's well-targeted and not just randomly scanning for and defacing vulnerable sites. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Does malware count as a hack for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
• Do ransomware hacks count for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
  • I think we should include if there was data leaked in the public interest. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Do commercial hacks count for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
• Do state sponsored hacks count for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
  • What about cases like Shaltai-Boltai or Lulzsec that started off independent but were later run by states? I think it's fine to include but we should put a note about state involvement. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

• Do "script kiddie" hacks count for the purpose of the wiki and the Hacker History section?
  • I don't think we should include untargeted attacks, like script kiddies just scanning the internet and defacing whatever vulnerable websites they find. If the hack is of a well-chosen target but the methods are basic or "script kiddie" I think it's fine for inclusion. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

• Do hacks have to meet a notability test, similar to Wikipedia articles?
  • I don't think there needs to be a notability test, but if the wiki starts getting unbalanced with too many articles about some not-so-notable hacker group then we'll think if we need standards Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

• • If something that wouldn't otherwise qualify is especially notable, does that make a difference?
• How should the wiki treat anonymous (lowercase a) research?
• How should the wiki treat claims, statements and self-identifications from dishonest hackers?
  • At what point does correcting this become doxing and does it matter?
  • In theory this site is just documenting what's already been public so I don't think we're doxing anyone. If a hacker claimed something that's probably false, I think we should include it, with a note about why it's probably false. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• If the wiki seeks to capture a sort of oral history of hackers, it'll inevitably capture disputed claims - should it seek to reconcile these, or simply record them and their discordance?
  • We should just record the different claims, unless there's very strong evidence that one is correct and the other is just wrong. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• How should the wiki handle allegations of hackers cooperating with law enforcement, etc.?
  • We shouldn't accuse without good evidence but if there's solid evidence I think it's worth including Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• How much media should be hosted on the wiki?
• Should the wiki include things like logs?
• How much cultural content should go on the wiki? e.g. Hacker zines
  • It's fine to include but I don't think it's that important to mirror stuff that's already in phrack or textfiles.com or otherwise well-archived and unlikely to disappear. Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• What about non-English content?
  • non-english content is good Enlacehacktivista (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2021 (UTC)