Category talk:Computer security specialists

Untitled
This is not simply a duplicate of cryptographers. Most security spcialists such as Steve Bellovin are NOT cryptographers, most elite cryptographers are primarily mathematicians. The overlap is actually small. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorgonzilla (talk • contribs) 19:14, 14 August 2005

To Do
Should add in biographies for notable security specialists who do architecture:


 * Tony Nadalin (Main architect WS-*)
 * Eric Rescorla (Main architect S-HTTP, IAB mamber)
 * Russ Housely (IETF security AD)
 * Phill Hallam-Baker (HTTP-Digest, Shen, XKMS, SAML, WS-*, VeriSign Principal Scientist, also Web pioneer)
 * Stephen Farrell (AAARCH, Baltimore CS, XKMS)
 * Burt Kaliski (Most of the PKCS line, RC2, etc, also add to cryptographers)
 * Hoyt Kesterton (X.509 raporeur)
 * Michael Baum (How can we forget!)

There are also lists of notable operations people Shimomura, Stoll, etc.

Some of the people listed as cryptographers are really not. In some cases the category makes sense because thats how people see them and might thus want to do a lookup. In other cases though (Peter Gutman) they are really a security person.

I think we should delete all the hacker handles from the category. They are at best insecurity specialists. Few have expertise that exceeds their egos. --Gorgonzilla 21:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Do we have any criteria to draw a line who to include ? I am not convinced that a fundamental difference can be made between black- or white-hat hackers/security specialists, the required skillz being largely identical. Splitting the category in something like security researchers and requiring academic achievements for inclusion and a hacker list with less formal criteria seems a bit artificial. forgot my sig, sorry. --Ministry of Truth —Preceding undated comment added 22:16, 16 June 2006‎


 * It has improved sice. At one time there were more fancruft entries of obscure crackers than real security professionals. -- Gorgonzilla 01:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I've done some cleanup, based on "I know it when I see it", until there's anything better ;-). We should probably continue the effort to keep a level that keeps imposters, self-promoters and even serious people without significant relevance in terms of computer security out of here. --Ministry of Truth 13:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I know this thread is from 2006, but it's something likely to come up again: "I think we should delete all the hacker handles from the category. They are at best insecurity specialists. Few have expertise that exceeds their egos." <= I doubt this is the one category exempt from NPOV. Also, the title is People associated with computer security, not "Corporate Computer Security Researchers" - there's a degree of overlap between this and List of computer criminals. I do of course have a degree of personal investment in both topics and would recuse myself from making judgment calls on either.
 * — A drian L amo ··  17:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

which Michael Baum? The Splunk founder or the Chair of the ISC? or another one? Links to some medical researcher on Wikipedia.

I copied the remaining red links above to Requested_articles/Applied_arts_and_sciences/Computer_science,_computing,_and_Internet. -- Beland (talk) 17:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Index order
I'm curious why there is such a fancy index ordering? For example, for "A" there are two people (both named Alexander) who have their surnames begining with a different letter (e.g. Alexander Peslyak should be listed under "P", IMHO). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.141.204.58 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 20 November 2006

The reason the indexing is wrong is that articles in categories are by default listed in alphabetical order of the articles. For people, the category tags should be tweaked to avoid this. For instance if you see that Alexander Kornbrust is categorized under A, then go in his article, edit, and change to. Pascal.Tesson 03:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggest we delete this list
Many on this list do not belong and many who belong are missing. This is the wrong list and needs to go. Those on the list may disagree? John 06:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)