Talk:Computer security
Should User4's last edit be put under a "security methods" section?
1- I agree with you, User4 information is extremely helpful but it should not be placed under "External links", it should be placed somewhere else.
2-I also would like to delete the link to AgoraDrugs, not only I don't think it is appropiate to have a link to a website/newsletter promoting hard drugs like cocaine and heroin, the site has not been updated since 2015 so it is out of date. (Note: I deleted the link as I have to ensure BoyWiki's security - Etenne)
3- I noticed annotations in the wiki saying "Not true of all browsers" or "not true" and "spelling?", I would like to suggest that instead of annotations the text is fixed and the annotations is made here in the talk page instead of the main page.
4- I see lots of references about law enforcement in this page, I would like to suggest this is toned down because it can give the impression to law enforcement members reading the Wiki that we are assisting crime, when the mission of boywiki privacy pages are assisting people in privacy to avoid discrimination and assist privacy as a human right, nothing to do with anything else.
Just my opinion, when writing something one should assume 100% that law enforcement is reading it too and ask himself, could this be misconstrued to look like we are assisting crime? And if it looks like you are doing that, best change the wording because press and cops love to make up stories that don't exist and frame people.
When instructing people about privacy it is best to make references about NSA illegal spying or hackers and how to protect from them, instead of references to law enforcement.
--Eskimo (talk) 16:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Like this:
Security Methods
Have two computers; a normal everyday one to use for everything not BL related, and a separate one with no hard drive in it. Just slip in a 'Tails OS CD', boot from that and you are up and running on a secure Tor system that does not leave any history on your computer that can be used in court. You may want to look into that here:
- I do not understand why the information (which is 100% accurate) that I included:
- NOTE: If you wish to skip the details of browser security, and use a safe, secure "out-of-the-box" program, see the article on the Tor proxy with its built-in special version of Firefox browser that, when used properly, will keep you safe and not store any browser history on your computer.
- ... has been removed. User4 (talk) 14:35, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
- I do not understand why the information (which is 100% accurate) that I included:
- I have read all the (major) documentation on the Tor site, as well as the links purporting to support criticisms made on BoyChat that "Tor is unsafe." I have found nothing to support the statement, "Tor is not safe". It is clear to me that--used correctly--Tor is safe. What leads you to believe that it is not safe? User4 (talk) 03:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
User4 and Wanker
You guys have been doing a good job at staying civil with each other which i very much appreciate. Please continue to try to work together and make this the best entry it can be even if there are points of contention. I appreciate and am excited about the work both of you guys are putting in to this entry. --Etenne 
15:09, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Grammatical errors in the article
There are many grammatical errors in this article. There are also many assumptions which are not, I believe, supported by evidence. I think these problems should be corrected. User4 (talk) 03:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
When copying and pasting links please test them, I found a couple of links that did not work, I erased them, nothing personal, they just did not work. Ideally, is best not to link to long URLs and hobby blogs because many times the sites top working after a year --Eskimo (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
