Talk:Computer and network surveillance

message: Just as a note, the article says that fire optics can't be tapped without detection.  Fibre optic cables can be read without breaking into the core.  By stripping of the sheath and bending the fibre at the right angle, enough signal passes straight on to be detected by sensitive equipment.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.90.96 (talk) 18:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: . I'm not sure when the change was made or by whom, but the article no longer mentions fibre optics. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Fibre optics

message: The implication of surveillance definition in wikipedia by this author is considered as clear and understandable, user friendly. The key concept being discussed is logically available for users to adapt and concern with the meaning. By providing hyperlinks connecting to computer based knowledge lead to easier way in finding information without having to go browsing from page one to the end just to find little information, in doubt. The used of web 2.0 which allows other Wikipedia users to add up references, editing existing topics and rate certain topics made it more believable and  reliable. 
The author also classifies the information by breaking the contents into specific genre of texts uploaded.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halyza (talk • contribs) 05:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Strengths

message: I am about to remove an "update" template from the top of the article that said:
:Parts of this article (those related to the Edward Snowden revelations) are outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2013)
I don't find anything in the article about Edward Snowden to update. Perhaps this was a call to add information about the Edward Snowden revelations to the article. I'm not sure that such an addition is needed since the Edward Snowden revelations are well covered in other Wikipedia articles. I did add a number of links to the See also section of the article that link to articles about "Surveillance by the United States government" including some that cover the Edward Snowden revelations. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edward Snowden revelations update? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Computer and network surveillance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120907032500/http://www.baller.com/pdfs/ACE.pdf to http://www.baller.com/pdfs/ACE.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130506102113/http://www.ejpd.admin.ch/content/ejpd/de/home/themen/sicherheit/ueberwachung_des_post-/faq_vuepf.faq_3.html to http://www.ejpd.admin.ch/content/ejpd/de/home/themen/sicherheit/ueberwachung_des_post-/faq_vuepf.faq_3.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have articulated some suggestions that could be used to improve this article further. Some of the sentences written in this article don’t have a source cited, but the majority of the ones that do have appropriate and reliable references. They include sources like the New York Times, Times Magazine, USA TODAY and academic sources such as databases. The problem that I noticed was that almost every one of the cited sources are very outdated. Some don’t even exist anymore (I have noted which ones those are). Nothing is plagiarized or close paraphrased and everything in this article relates to the topic. The article is neutral, but I did notice a sentence that was more of an opinion rather than a fact. In the section titled Corporate Surveillance, in the paragraph under the bullet points the opinion is “There should be a distinction between an employee's personal electronic devices, which should be limited and proscribed, and those owned by the firm.” Mabate01 (talk) 14:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Suggestions 

message: There’s a term called Malicious Code, harmful computer code or web script, that is created to cause harm to a computer's system. Malicious code can take on multiple forms such as, ActiveX controls, Java Applets, plug-ins and more. When the code gets inside the computer it can infect mail servers and be disguised as a mail attachment. It can also spread easily throughout other networked computer.
NCCIC. “Security Tip (ST18-004).” "Plan, Do, Check, Act" | US-CERT, 28 Sept. 2018, www.us-cert.gov/ncas/tips/ST18-271.
“Malicious Code.” CA Veracode, 21 Dec. 2018, www.veracode.com/security/malicious-code.
Kaspersky. “What Is Malicious Code?” Usa.kaspersky.com, usa.kaspersky.com/resource-center/definitions/malicious-code.
Techopedia. “What Is Malicious Code? - Definition from Techopedia.” Techopedia.com, www.techopedia.com/definition/4014/malicious-code.
“Malicious Code Information.” Spyware Statistics, 27 Feb. 2019, www3.safenet-inc.com/csrt/malicious-code-more.aspx.
“Malicious Code Protection.” Nd.gov - The Official Portal for North Dakota State Government, 10 July 2018, www.nd.gov/itd/services/it-security/malicious-code-protection. Mabate01 (talk) 02:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malicious Code 

message: I thought this was good but the first link didn't work and the second led to the google search but the first result was your source so you should fix that. I didn't see any writing issues though but remember to match a sentence  or part to each source and this addition would go great as a sub section to the malicious software section! J lucciano (talk) 20:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review to Malicious Code addition MAbate