Talk:List of hackers

Assange hacker

@Msnicki: - re your comment frmo this edit - don't think Julian Assange is a hacker and our article doesn't claim he is, either. - Have you read the article? Specifically the part of the article that reads "In 1987, Assange began hacking under the name Mendax". NickCT (talk) 02:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I agree. I've reverted myself. Msnicki (talk) 02:56, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@Msnicki: - You rock! Thanks. NickCT (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

HACKER

ADESH KOLTE INDIAN HACKER 49.14.206.79 (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as there is no article on Adesh Kolte and the list only includes hackers notable enough to have their own article on the English Wikipedia. - Arjayay (talk) 09:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Categorization

Since hacker is a loaded term with varying meaning depending on presenter and context, is it possible we could group entries by which particular domain of hacking these individuals may happen to fall under? Something like Programmer, hardware hacker/hobbyist, computer security etc?

Also: the inclusion of prose and short descriptors for entries is welcome as well, should anyone be so inclined. -- dsprc ^[talk] 03:06, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

recent additions

@Dsprc: Are all of these people "known for their hacking acts"? I'm worried this list is going to turn useless if we add literally everyone who has ever engaged in "hacking", broadly construed. Maybe the lead section should be more specific about what kind of hackers we're listing here. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 13:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

For which additions do you refer specifically? Feel free to rewrite text of lede section; not sure how it should read so left it alone. The issues of categorization has been raised but there was no response or feedback. The term has been expanded by the press (eg Phone hacking) and these usages have entered the popular lexicon so /some/ feedback is desired to sort this out (no pun!). -- dsprc ^[talk] 14:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't be complaining here if I knew what to do/had specific suggestions, lol. :p Basically, I don't know. That's the problem. Someone who does know what's going on here should clear this up. You're adding people here so I assume you know more than I do. Who are these people? How would you summarize this current list of people? I would list people who have engaged in notable hacking attempts in the criminal/illegal sense, and say so in the lead section. So Tim Berners-Lee for example would not qualify. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 14:39, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@Dsprc: I agree with Jeraphine Gryphon. This is not what the list is for. From Hacker (term), "Today, mainstream usage of "hacker" mostly refers to computer criminals, due to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s." There is no point to adding people to this list based on an historical definition of the term, especially where the historical definition you seem to rely on would include anyone "who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and computer networks", a term so broad as to be meaningless. I reverted the two additions I saw, L Peter Deutsch and John McCarthy, two very serious computer scientists, and you've added them back. I reverted you and you've instantly reverted me again. Now I see it's a whole slew of these silly additions. Please stop. You do not anything close to a consensus for this. What you have are objections you're not listening to. I think all of this should be reverted. Msnicki (talk) 15:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We already have List of computer criminals if all you want to include are computer criminals. Some entries in this list are probably a dupe of that and should be merged there. Hacker term has a lot of other content so the excerpt is cherry picking. If an individual has sources that indicate they're hackers, then I don't see why they should be not be included in a list of hackers; this is why the note of references was welcomed (even though MS they're not needed); as I can source my additions. We've a whole slew of publications since the 80s about hackers being something other than criminals. a, b, c, d, e, f and so forth. The fact that you stated TMRC aren't hackers is laughable because they are the original hackers and invented the term. Just because someone is a "serious computer scientist" doesn't mean they're disqualified from being a hacker. I included Deutsch with sources, but not McCarthy, even though he bootstrapped SAIL. Which additions are "silly"? -- dsprc ^[talk] 15:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

True, someone could be both a serious computer scientist and a hacker as the term is used today and if it says in their bio that they're known as both a serious computer scientist and a hacker (presumably, with the proper sources), you can include them here. But you need it to say that in their bio, you can't just add people because you think they qualify under a historical definition that isn't the common usage anymore, especially, given WP:BLP, when there's a serious pejorative (criminal) meaning associated today. Quite simply, you do not have consensus. What part of that is confusing? Msnicki (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

That's a good point, if we already have a list of computer criminals then we don't want to duplicate the purpose of that article. So how do we define hackers in this list here?

"this is why the note of references was welcomed (even though MS they're not needed);" -- yes they are. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 16:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

To be on the List of computer criminals, you have to satisfy the stated criteria, "Convicted computer criminals are people who are caught and convicted of computer crimes". Not all hackers get convicted. More worrisome to me is making this list indistinguishable from List of programmers and suddenly labeling serious people with a pejorative term. Msnicki (talk) 16:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We need to define "hacker" here in a way that does not violate the WP:BLP policy -- we need to remember that the term hacker has certain connotations, and we can't run around calling random people hackers because we think the label kinda applies to them.

Another option that we have is blanking this list and redirecting it to the computer criminals list, or just delete it. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 16:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I would have voted for not doing a huge revert, and instead just removing the specific names that we think should not be here... — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Which ones would you have kept? I didn't check absolutely every one of them but I checked enough to satisfy myself that these weren't people who hadn't been added to the list because they had been previously overlooked, they were added under a new definition of the inclusion criteria. I have no objection to adding back the name of any individual whose bio identifies them as being known as a hacker, I just doubt there were any. Msnicki (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

The article for hacker should define the definition. Criteria in the header only linked to the main hacker article which covers broad range of sub-cultures. Main article is divided in sections, I don't see why we can't do the same here. If only related to computer security aspect then list should be renamed to reflect this (in the manner of Category:People associated with computer security). -- dsprc ^[talk] 18:42, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

References

Also, according to WP:NLIST, every entry needs a reference saying that the person is a hacker. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 13:26, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll work on sourcing at least my own additions and could probably pick up many of the others in the process. Others watching over list are welcomed to share the load. -- dsprc ^[talk] 14:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

It's more than that. We do not normally clutter up lists of notable anything with references. Rather, we expect the blue-linked articles to say, usually right in the lead, the subject is whatever it is that is needed to be part of the list. This is a "list of notable hackers who are known for their hacking acts." If the article doesn't clearly say they're a hacker, using the term as it's commonly understood today, meaning a computer criminal, they should absolutely, positively not be on this list. Period. You are welcome to add them to List of programmers instead if they aren't already there. But not here. Msnicki (talk) 15:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

"We do not normally clutter up lists of notable anything with references." -- yes, because we're lazy. Lists of people should have references for each entry, according to WP:NLIST. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 15:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

For list of programmers, see: List of computer criminals. You're welcome to add them there as well. -- dsprc ^[talk] 15:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

It depends whether it's a stand-alone list, Jeraphine, or one that's included in a larger article. If it's a stand-alone list of notable individuals, the sources showing they qualify are expected to be in the blue-linked articles. Msnicki (talk) 15:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, exactly, this here is a standalone list which means we add bluelink articles WITH references. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 15:49, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We need to alphebeticalize the list of names at leasst. [User:DarthWyyrlok|DarthWyyrlok]] (talk)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2015

Amish Kumar (VEP)

References

Hacker6655blackhat (talk) 08:19, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Not done: No article = No inclusion - Arjayay (talk) 14:56, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2016

Nathan Hanshaw a/k/a dshocker —A male juvenile, who has been widely known in the hacker underground by his online moniker, “DSHOCKER,” was sentenced today in federal court to 11 months in prison, to be served in a juvenile detention facility, for computer intrusion, interstate threats, and wire fraud, stemming from hacking, botnet, and “swatting” activities. In accordance with federal law, the juvenile was not publicly named.

United States Attorney Michael J. Sullivan and Warren T. Bamford, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Boston Field Division, announced that a 17-year-old male juvenile from Massachusetts was sentenced before U.S. District Court Judge Dennis F. Saylor, IV, to 11 months in prison, to be served in a juvenile detention facility, followed by two years of supervised release.

At the November 18, 2008 change of plea hearing, the prosecutor told the Court that, had the case proceeded to trial, the government would have proven that, from 2005-2008, the defendant (1) hacked into multiple corporate computer systems and took command of thousands of other computers in a “botnet” (a network of infected computers), directing them to perform cyberattacks on victim computer servers; (2) placed hoax emergency telephone calls to elicit armed police responses from SWAT (“special weapons and tactics”) police teams and others, as well as reported phony bomb threats, and (3) made fraudulent credit card purchases with stolen credit cards. His “swatting” activities created a serious risk of physical harm to innocent victims, and the multiple bomb threats caused extensive disruptions to important public services. Furthermore, the defendant’s hacking activities were disruptive to major companies’ computer systems, and they wreaked havoc on tens of thousands of computers that were compromised.

The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Adam J. Bookbinder in Sullivan’s Economic Crimes Unit and Mona Sedky Spivack of the Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C.

http://www.networkworld.com/article/2347347/security/jack-of-all-dark-trades--swatter--botnet-herder--hacker-pleads-guilty.html https://in.norton.com/typical-trickery-of-teen-hackers/article http://www.pc1news.com/news/390/teenage-bot-herder-caught.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/19/dshocker_pleads_guilty/ http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Irate-Online-Gamer-Sentenced-in-Ventura-County-Swatting-Hoax-230944011.html - Second federal case

CScienceguy000 (talk) 00:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@CScienceguy00: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Pppery (talk) 22:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2016

add this name also : Pankaj Patidar (www.pankajpatidar.com) CEH 49.32.44.5 (talk) 20:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Linus Torvalds

I wanted to add Linus Torvalds as in the hacker culture he's known as one of the most famous hackers. However, I've seen he's been removed from the page, plus there's a note saying there has to be an _own article_ mentioning the person as a hacker. I'm not sure what exactly that means, but e.g. the book Rebel Code mentions him as a hacker several times: "And yet here was Linus Torvalds, one of the hacker princes ...". Does this count? Does the person themselves have to write they considers themselves a hacker? Drummyfish (talk) 12:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Drummyfish – You can largely ignore the note. If you have a source, you most certainly can reinclude Linus. There is no such requirement for inclusion here, or anywhere else in wikipedia. The only requirement is the same for everything else: WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:RS, etc. etc. -- dsprc ^[talk] 00:42, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2018

22385 2409:4042:2394:FD66:950C:1041:F5DB:935F (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done It is unclear what change (if any) is requested. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2018

Add Hacker Named "BackSlash" They're a Grey hat hacker, known most notably for hacking and finding the PowerSchool 2018-2019 exploit. They also know how to web develop, hack windows os, and remote install malware. 50.236.177.154 (talk) 13:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I looked for an article about them but did not find one. All entries must have an article. ~ GB fan 13:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2019

Can anyone please add this one to the list? 137.74.150.79 (talk) 16:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
(Pinging @GB fan: for attention) 137.74.150.79 (talk) 16:49, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done NiciVampireHeart 22:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! 137.74.150.79 (talk) 07:28, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2019

add a name Sayaan Alam to the list 12:04, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Highway 89 (talk) 14:49, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done non-notable (or redlinked: Sayaan Alam) entry in a list populated with notable entries.   melecie   t 02:34, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Jalal PILEHVARIAN have had accessed more than 80,000 database in 2008 but anonymously live no need to being famous

Being Alert 192.15.136.110 (talk) 01:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2022

40.138.182.216 (talk) 23:04, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

On the letter "N" section add "Nighthawk", He is also a notable hacker.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 07:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Jovirose Lauyog Perez Request on June 30,2024

Additional 110.54.174.83 (talk) 04:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

1. It's not June 30.
2. Whoever Jovirose Lauyog Perez is, we do not have an article about them so they will not be added to the list. Meters (talk) 05:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC).

addition of Phineas Fisher

I feel like Phineas Fisher is notable enough to be added due to the hacks carried out as well as the fact they already have a Wikipedia article on them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Fisher ZeChild (talk) 15:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)