Talk:Ethical hack

Remediation
This article uses the word "remediation" seventeen times. Not being entirely sure of its strict industry meaning, could somebody provide a few synonyms? --McGeddon (talk) 11:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of vendors and tools section
Folks, I'm thinking the vendors and tools section offers little of use for this article, for two reasons. Firstly, the list would have to be huge to be comprehensive, and Wikipedia is not in the practice of deciding who would be "best" out of the huge number available. Secondly, Wikipedia is not a collection of useful links, which is what this would end up becoming. Any reasons why it should be kept? Random name (talk) 07:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with removing the section entirely unless there's a specific tool related specifically to ethical hacking (which I'm nearly 100% certain there is not). any notable tools should be included under the wiki page for their specific function - e.g. nmap under port scanning etc. Whitehatnetizen (talk) 13:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * actually a large portion of the article should be re-written - the "Creating Internal Database for monitoring" section - what's with that? written like an advertisement.... Whitehatnetizen (talk) 13:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not even entirely sure why this article exists, as it's just a rarely (in my experience) used name for a penetration test, probably created by that company that churns out "ethical hackers," or graduates of said course. Random name (talk) 08:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Potential to merge into penetration test
Folks, is there any reason why this article should exist on its own? I can't see what differentiates an "ethical hack" from a penetration test - I've only ever known ethical hacking as an Americanism for penetration testing. I'd personally suggest merging this article into penetration test. Thoughts? Objections? Random name (talk) 15:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * agree wholeheartedly, if, there is in fact anything to salvage from this article that's worth placing in penetration test. perhaps a redirection from Ethical Hack to penetration test would be sufficient. Whitehatnetizen (talk) 09:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad it's not just me - should probably wait a few days for any objections before changing things. Most of this article reads as OR - maybe there are some principles that could be used to ID bits to add to penetration test, but you're right in thinking that by and large, it's just going to be removing this page. The redirect is a good idea. Random name (talk) 09:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Starting clearout
Hi all,

I'm going to start clearing out sections, either moving across to penetration test or simply deleting, as appropriate. My apologies, some people have put a lot of work into some of the sections here, but the sections are quite often simply original research - perfectly valid comments for some other wiki, or perhaps for articles, but not appropriate as cited material for an encyclopedia. These will be deleted. Random name (talk) 10:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)