273:. There are no reliable secondary sources cited, and the concept that log files are vulnerable to those with high level access (authorized or not) is basic security knowledge in any operating system. That is why log files are inadmissible as evidence in court, unless the logs were hard-copy printed in real time as the events were logged, and then only the original printouts are admissible. Any user with root (or equivalent) permissions on a system can change anything. This seems like a simple promotional article. It
188:
I looked around for some reports of
Winzapper actually being used in computer intrusions (e.g. by searching for +arrested +Winzapper) but found nothing. There may not be enough information out there for the article to grow much more. If that turns out to be the case, I would not be opposed to merging
380:
of non-trivial publications. These are just mentions, and would seem to be trivial to me. If there was an article or two that
Winzapper was the main subject of, in a reliable magazine or trade publication, that would help your case. But I am still not convinced that notability is established for a
172:
Sources 2 and 4 don't mention the product specifically at all. Source 3 seems like a press release, and thus is not an independent source. Source 5 seems like a blog, which does not meet our criteria as a reliable source, see
354:
437:. Winzapper has significance as a proof-of-concept tool, plus it is still apparently "the only shrink-wrapped tool that you can use to selectively delete events from the Security log" (per
376:
The last link does not even mention winzapper. There is no notability guideline for software that I can find, but all the other notability guidelines require that the subject be the
148:. Its release was an important event in IT security, causing log manipulation via selective event deletion to change from being a theoretical risk to a practical one.
355:
http://books.google.com/books?id=UVchzZjT-jcC&pg=PA228&lpg=PA228&dq=winzapper&source=web&ots=EnWURte1ct&sig=iCwKQHMmQqC1rMwMM6SODUZ0ZIc
477:
series and the other an article in Sys Admin. But the info has already been refactored to
Security Log anyway so it's kinda moot at this point.
238:
417:: Per above, specifically the fact that there are no secondary sources. I agree there may be a few sentances that can be put into
17:
91:
86:
95:
548:
36:
78:
547:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
340:
shoy is correct, neither of those is a reliable secondary source. They are both self-published sources. -
234:
505:
528:
512:
495:
481:
465:
445:
425:
397:
385:
369:
344:
335:
320:
301:
285:
262:
243:
214:
197:
183:
164:
152:
139:
60:
509:
478:
442:
394:
366:
317:
298:
122:
492:
330:
194:
178:
149:
134:
314:
49:
310:
229:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
438:
391:
362:
454:
326:
174:
126:
382:
341:
282:
82:
458:
130:
462:
358:
193:. There is some pertinent information here that is not in the Security Log article.
434:
422:
418:
325:
What about them? Frankly, they both look like blogs to me, which are generally not
294:
278:
259:
207:
190:
112:
253:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
521:
54:
525:
211:
161:
74:
66:
159:
Speedy Keep as plenty of third-party sources have been added since listing.
357:). Also, Winzapper is mentioned in Certified Ethical Hacker courses (e.g.
48:
to delete or merge. Please pursue any further merge proposals through the
309:. No reliable second sources? What about the Forensic Footprint article?
293:. I think we should include the info about admissibility in court in the
129:
on Google that this software has been reviewed, and thus it is not
491:
as free utility software is as about as notable as a paperclip. --
473:. We have at least two sources that meet WP:RS, one a book in the
541:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
501:
361:). Plus it was covered in Sys Admin (just added to article; see
390:
Oops, my bad, I gave the wrong link before. I have corrected it
520:
Keep in mind that
Knowledge (XXG) does have an article about
500:
If that were true of free utility software as a whole, then
315:
http://www.seifried.org/security/os/microsoft/windowsnt.html
311:
http://forensics.8thdaytech.com/winzapper-forensic-foorprint
524:. (So that's a poor rationale for deleting this article.)
439:
http://www.ultimatewindowssecurity.com/ebookChapter2.html
297:
article. Do you have any other sources relating to that?
363:
http://www.samag.com/documents/s=9366/sam0104o/0104o.htm
125:, nominating at the author's request. I can't find any
108:
104:
100:
258:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
359:http://www.onlc.com/outline.asp?ccode=SCEH41ONLINE
202:Given arguments now in operation, I now vote for
551:). No further edits should be made to this page.
313:What about the Microsoft Security White Paper?
228:, seems notable and new sources have surfaced.
453:- As noted in other AfD discussions, lack of
8:
381:stand-alone article at this time. Sorry. -
277:be just notable enough to be mentioned in
281:, so a merge might be appropriate. -
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
433:all non-overlapping information to
24:
446:12:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
426:00:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
398:20:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
386:20:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
370:19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
345:19:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
336:18:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
321:12:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
286:00:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
263:23:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
244:14:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
215:21:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
198:12:53, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
184:11:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
165:03:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
153:02:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
140:01:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
1:
508:would be deletable as well.
353:ref (just added to article;
529:00:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
513:17:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
496:15:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
482:00:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
466:00:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
302:13:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
61:01:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
568:
544:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
506:Pine (e-mail client)
349:OK, what about the
421:, but not much. -
204:merge and redirect
133:by our standards.
457:is indicative of
265:
242:
559:
546:
455:reliable sources
333:
327:reliable sources
257:
255:
232:
181:
137:
116:
98:
57:
34:
567:
566:
562:
561:
560:
558:
557:
556:
555:
549:deletion review
542:
475:Hacking Exposed
351:Hacking Exposed
331:
251:
179:
135:
89:
73:
70:
55:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
565:
563:
554:
553:
536:
534:
533:
532:
531:
515:
510:Captain Zyrain
486:
485:
484:
479:Captain Zyrain
448:
443:Captain Zyrain
428:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
395:Captain Zyrain
367:Captain Zyrain
338:
318:Captain Zyrain
304:
299:Captain Zyrain
267:
266:
256:
248:
247:
246:
222:
221:
220:
219:
218:
217:
169:
168:
155:
119:
118:
69:
64:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
564:
552:
550:
545:
539:
538:
537:
530:
527:
523:
519:
516:
514:
511:
507:
503:
499:
498:
497:
494:
493:Gavin Collins
490:
487:
483:
480:
476:
472:
469:
468:
467:
464:
460:
456:
452:
449:
447:
444:
440:
436:
432:
429:
427:
424:
420:
416:
413:
399:
396:
392:
389:
388:
387:
384:
379:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
347:
346:
343:
339:
337:
334:
328:
324:
323:
322:
319:
316:
312:
308:
305:
303:
300:
296:
292:
289:
288:
287:
284:
280:
276:
272:
271:Strong delete
269:
268:
264:
261:
254:
250:
249:
245:
240:
236:
231:
227:
224:
223:
216:
213:
209:
205:
201:
200:
199:
196:
195:Stayman Apple
192:
187:
186:
185:
182:
176:
171:
170:
167:
166:
163:
160:
156:
154:
151:
150:Stayman Apple
147:
144:
143:
142:
141:
138:
132:
128:
124:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
58:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
543:
540:
535:
517:
488:
474:
470:
450:
435:Security log
430:
419:Security Log
414:
377:
350:
306:
295:security log
290:
279:Security Log
274:
270:
252:
230:CRGreathouse
225:
208:Security log
203:
191:Security Log
158:
157:
145:
120:
53:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
522:Paper clips
461:issues. /
459:notability
121:Contested
383:Crockspot
342:Crockspot
283:Crockspot
123:WP:SPEEDY
75:Winzapper
67:Winzapper
50:editorial
463:Blaxthos
431:Refactor
189:it with
518:Comment
471:Comment
423:Rjd0060
378:subject
307:Comment
291:Comment
260:John254
131:notable
92:protect
87:history
52:route.
489:Delete
451:Delete
415:Delete
96:delete
56:Daniel
175:WP:RS
127:WP:RS
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
526:Rray
504:and
502:GIMP
332:shoy
226:Keep
212:Alba
180:shoy
162:Alba
146:Keep
136:shoy
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
275:may
206:to
441:)
393:.
365:)
329:.
237:|
210:.
177:.
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
241:)
239:c
235:t
233:(
117:–
115:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.