Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer security

Handling duplicative articles

@Joereddington I support figuring out how to deal with the many poorly-sourced, vague, and duplicative articles in this topic area, but I support avoiding WP:BATHWATER through applying Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. This includes: "If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page." and "If two pages are duplicates or otherwise redundant, one should be merged and redirected to the other, using the most common, or more general page name." I'll write notes on the talk pages for Information security awareness, Software security assurance, and Security kernel. Dreamyshade (talk) 16:11, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I think I'm reading this as "Stop PRODing things" and that's fair enough - my thing is just that there are _so_ many articles that are content forks, bording on POV content forks and _so_ few editors... Certainly I'm happy to take more relaxed approach while we work on all the other things to do... Joe (talk) 05:07, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry! I find PROD really helpful for articles about obscure companies and products, but I do hesitate on it for terms and topics because the old content just disappears, and it creates broken incoming links unless somebody fixes them. I like to use WP:BLAR (blank-and-redirect) for articles that are too obscure or duplicative to be worth fixing, and that have minimal content worth merging. It's faster than PROD - doesn't require a waiting period or discussion - and it's easy for somebody to reverse in the future if they want to go back and rescue some content or build out the article. I also consider it fine to do a minimal-effort copy-and-paste merge of any potentially-worthwhile parts, without trying to integrate them very well into the target article, with an edit summary that provides credit. Somebody else can fix that up. Dreamyshade (talk) 05:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Ran into the annoying security awareness cluster again and nominated for merge: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information security awareness.

Also nominated this redundant article: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Automated penetration testing.

On the other hand, I found a draft for Sectigo that allowed me to split it out from Xcitium (both formerly known as divisions of Comodo), which was overdue! Dreamyshade (talk) 22:50, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Articles in scope that are tagged for AI cleanup

Based on this query, processed with Projo to rank in approximate order of pageviews over the past 60 days:

• uBlock Origin – Web browser content blocking extension
• Pegasus (spyware) – Israeli mobile phone spyware
• Privacy law – Area of law
• Kaspersky Lab – Russian multinational cybersecurity and anti-virus provider
• Randomization – Process of making something random
• Entrust – American digital security company
• Microsoft SmartScreen – Microsoft Windows anti-malware system
• Internet security awareness – End-user knowledge of cybersecurity

Tips: Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Guide. Dreamyshade (talk) 07:07, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

I took a swing at Internet security awareness. Joe (talk) 15:27, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Unreferenced articles

For anyone interested in the August 2026 Unreferenced article backlog drive, a few articles in scope with zero references:

• Certified Payment-Card Industry Security Implementer – Set of security requirements for card processorsPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
• Fail-stop – Failure model in distributed computing
• International Computer Security Association
• Offline private key protocol
• Quarantine (antivirus program)
• Security Attribute Modulation Protocol
• Service central de la sécurité des systèmes d'informations
• Web hosting control panel – Web application to manage servers

Dreamyshade (talk) 04:38, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrollers needed

Would anyone like to help review new computer security articles? I just recently picked up a new way to help with this: if you request and receive permissions to do Wikipedia:New pages patrol, you can review new articles to ensure they meet basic standards. If they do, you click "reviewed", and the article can get indexed by search engines. If they don't, you tag them for improvement, WP:DRAFTIFY them, nominate them for deletion, or take other action.

There's a huge backlog right now, so they need more reviewers who are experienced editors with a decent understanding of the notability guidelines. I made a database report that shows unreviewed articles in scope for this project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security/Unreviewed articles. So if you get that permission, you can help process those articles! Dreamyshade (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Relevant discussion

As Cyberwarfare and China is part of this WikiProject, it would be good to get others' views on this discussion: Talk:Cyberwarfare and China#Split part of this into Cyberwarfare by China. Amigao (talk) 05:11, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:OpenAI–HuggingFace incident § Requested move 16 September 2026

An editor has requested that OpenAI–HuggingFace incident be moved to 2026 OpenAI agent cyberattacks, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 12:53, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
(Notification provided by Move+)

Joshua Michael and his Flock Safety research

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Disclosure: I am an independent researcher with no personal, professional, or financial affiliation with Joshua Michael, Nexanet, or DataMinimal. I am not being paid or acting on their behalf to request or create Wikipedia coverage. I became interested in the subject through publicly available reporting and research.

Hello. Would an editor be interested in reviewing the sources below and considering an article about Joshua Michael, a cybersecurity researcher associated with Nexanet and the Flock Surveillance Map?

His research is published at joshuamichaelresearch.com and flocksurveillance.org. It includes reported security vulnerabilities, a device-location dataset and interactive map, a research paper, a disclosure memorandum, and camera-exposure studies covering 22 military, intelligence, federal, and defense-related locations.

I would appreciate advice on whether the independent coverage supports a biography, an article about the research project, or additions to the existing Flock Safety article. If a separate article is appropriate, would a volunteer consider writing it?

Main news sources

• The Intercept, September 24, 2026 — reporting on Michael’s research, the map, how he says he obtained the device records, and the dispute over removing the website.

• Suncoast Searchlight, May 1, 2026 — Alice Herman describes Michael’s discovery of exposed credentials and quotes him about privacy risks from centralized data analysis.

• The Guardian, April 6, 2026 — names Michael alongside Benn Jordan and Jon Gaines in discussing demonstrations of Flock camera vulnerabilities.

• 9NEWS, November 19, 2025 — names and quotes Michael concerning Flock’s security and includes the company’s response.

• Flare, September 18, 2026 — technical analysis citing Nexanet’s January research about development systems issuing production-scoped access tokens.

• Tom’s Hardware, September 27, 2026 — covers Michael’s mapping project and the takedown dispute. It draws on The Intercept rather than providing entirely separate original reporting.

The research

These are Michael’s own publications, included to explain the work discussed in outside sources. I have not established that they underwent academic peer review.

• “‘Never Hacked’: The National Security and Accountability Failures in Flock Safety’s Nationwide Dynamic Surveillance Network” (PDF) — dated September 2, 2026. The viewer lists 160 pages. It presents four reported security failures, a disclosure chronology, Michael’s account of retrieving 335,701 device and deployment records, and route-exposure modeling around 22 sites. It includes technical appendices, methodology, evidence provenance, limitations, and references.

• “Four Disclosed Flock Safety and FlockNova Vulnerabilities” (PDF) — a supporting memorandum describing the findings and disclosure timeline. It distinguishes the static ArcGIS credential exposure from the pre-login credential-issuance path Michael reports using to retrieve the inventory.

• National Security Exposure Studies — assessments for 22 locations. These model whether plausible public-road trips would encounter mapped cameras; they do not document the tracking of actual individuals.

• “Flock Safety and FlockNova: A Complete Guide” (PDF) — a 48-page guide covering hardware, software, search tools, and data-fusion functions.

• “A Misconfigured Demo Exposed Flock Safety’s 83,000 Camera Nationwide Tracking System” — an earlier technical investigation. The current page credits Joshua Michael and displays July 16, 2025; the amicus brief listed below cites the article under a different name and date.

• “Flock Said It Does Not Use Dark Web Data. Analysis of Their Code Tells a Different Story,” December 12, 2025 — analysis of FlockNova application code and the company’s public statements.

• “53 Times Flock Safety Hardcoded the Password for America’s Surveillance Infrastructure” — the report discussed on Hacker News in January 2026 and referenced in later technical publications.

• Interactive map and dataset table — the reported inventory contains device and deployment records, not exclusively license plate readers.

• Dokumen copy of “Never Hacked” — another location for the same report, not an independent publication or review.

The research claims should be attributed where appropriate and considered alongside Flock’s responses. The route estimates use a historical snapshot and modeling assumptions, including assumptions about planned devices.

Legal citations, testimony, and interviews

• Amicus brief in Commonwealth v. Ronnie D. Church, Court of Appeals of Virginia, filed August 28, 2025 — submitted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, American Civil Liberties Union, and ACLU of Virginia. In discussing ALPR security problems, the brief cites Nexanet’s “How a Misconfigured Demo Exposed Flock Safety’s 83,000-Camera Nationwide Tracking System” on printed page 20, footnote 49. It credits “Joshua Garett” and dates the article July 15, 2025, whereas the current Nexanet page credits Joshua Michael and displays July 16. These differences need clarification. The brief’s archived reference points to the same Nexanet article. This documents citation of the research in an amicus filing, not a judicial finding or endorsement.

• NACDL’s case and brief page — identifies the filing date, case number, participating organizations, and arguments, and provides another copy of the same brief. This is supporting information about one filing, not a second independent citation of the research.

• Benn Jordan’s written Senate Judiciary subcommittee testimony, September 23, 2026 — names Michael and discusses his findings. This documents their inclusion in the testimony, not a Senate endorsement.

• Benn Jordan, “We Hacked Flock Safety Cameras in under 30 Seconds,” November 16, 2025 — features Michael explaining his research and links his report.

• Benn Jordan on The Jordan Harbinger Show — discusses Michael’s findings around 47–49 minutes. Jordan describes having worked with Michael.

• Jack Neel interview, September 4, 2026 — a long-form interview about Michael’s research and privacy work. It identifies Nexanet as his company and links DataMinimal. It also includes promotional material for Nexanet.

Other coverage and references

These vary in depth and independence. Several summarize the same reporting.

• Cape Fear Beacon, August 11, 2026 — names Michael in reporting on New Hanover County’s surveillance purchases, drawing on Jordan and The Guardian.

• Hudson TV, September 27, 2026 — discusses Michael and the map dispute, citing coverage from The Intercept and Tom’s Hardware.

• Gadget Review, September 25, 2026 — summarizes the map story, relying on The Intercept. Also republished by Yahoo.

• The Daily Caller, September 27, 2026 — additional coverage drawing on The Intercept.

• LEOsphere, September 25, 2026 — names Michael and summarizes the map story, identifying The Intercept as its source.

• Sicherheitssignal, September 24, 2026 — a summary naming Michael and citing The Intercept.

• El Reportero, September 25, 2026 — commentary naming Michael and discussing the map, with attribution to The Intercept.

• The Shield, September 9, 2026 — a Westmont student-publication article naming Michael in its discussion of Jordan’s investigation.

• WGCU and WUSF — republications of the Suncoast Searchlight story, not separate original reports.

• Interval News, September 25, 2026 — an Instagram post whose search-indexed text names Michael and attributes the map reporting to The Intercept. The complete post could not be accessed during checking, and a separate original Interval News article has not been verified.

• GainSec, January 9, 2026 — Jon Gaines identifies Josh Michael as founder of Nexanet AI and discusses their participation in Jordan’s coverage. This is an involved researcher’s account.

• Footnote4a, December 17, 2025 — discusses Joshua’s Nexanet analysis of FlockNova’s alleged use of “Dark Data.”

• Footnote4a, July 31, 2026 — discusses Nexanet’s January report and Flock’s audit commitments.

• Mission Meets Tech, August 11, 2026 — cites Nexanet’s FlockNova analysis as reference 9.

• Maryville Residents for Privacy — advocacy material naming Michael and discussing his research. It attributes the Nova findings to Nexanet rather than claiming independent reproduction.

• Hacker News, January 9, 2026 — discussion of the “53 Times” report. It showed 522 points and 178 comments when checked on September 27, 2026. This is community discussion, not verification of the findings.

Business background and public visibility

Nexanet and DataMinimal provide affiliated business information. DataMinimal identifies Nexanet as its sister company. The Mozilla listing for DataMinimal Privacy Helper documents the product but is developer-supplied. The Good Ancestor Foundation’s Privacy Guide also briefly recommends Nexanet.

Social-profile links supplied for Michael’s current handle, “whoisjoshuamichael,” are Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube. His LinkedIn profile uses his name. These current handles have not been independently rechecked, and follower figures previously retrieved under older handles are omitted.

Video metadata retrieved on September 27, 2026 showed approximately 3.17 million views for Benn Jordan’s video featuring Michael and 308,000 for Jack Neel’s interview. These are views of the publishers’ videos, not Michael’s own accounts. They are included only as context about visibility, not as evidence of notability.

I understand that the number of links, the length of the reports, and audience figures do not establish notability by themselves. I would welcome an editor’s assessment of the independent coverage and the most appropriate scope for an article.

Thank you. ~~~~

~2026-52176-33 (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

If you'd like to start a WP: draft, you may. See WP:YFA. guninvalid (talk) 23:22, 27 September 2026 (UTC)