Talk:Tailored Access Operations

Tailored Access?

I've a question. "Tailored Access", what does it mean?--OnionBulb ^{Talk ⁄ Contributions}.- 18:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I guess, something like getting access in a careful and precise way, compare "tailor made". P2Peter (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

An extremely polite way of saying hacking. --Paulmd199 (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Recent refs

Sorry I don't have time to edit, but here are some refs from last few days:

• The Guardian, 12/29/13
• CNET, 12/29/13
• CNN, 12/31/13
• Info Security Magazine 1/3/14. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 19:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

QUANTUM attacks

The list of "some FOXACID modules" contains links to the Wikipedia articles of legitimate websites, implying that these websites ARE FOXACID modules, rather than being potential targets. Is this correct?152.51.56.1 (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

• Eh, I think it's obvious those modules are used to attack users going to those specific sites. An example of how they used their linkedin module (which spoofs/mimics LinkedIn) is given here. Someone not using his real name (talk) 15:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

This page isn't quite right.

I feel like there is a lot of WP:SYNTH going on here, as well as an odd tone and style used throughout. There are also some pretty critical citations missing.

I think this article might need a lot of fixing.

Jasphetamine (talk) 23:13, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tailored Access Operations. 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/20140115014135/http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/111113-british-spies-reportedly-spoofed-linkedin-275807.html to http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/111113-british-spies-reportedly-spoofed-linkedin-275807.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Posting Classified Documents on Wikipedia

Hello.

There is currently a reference made in Tailored Access Operations which includes an image of what appears to be an alleged U.S. government classified document. I am new here, to Wikipedia, and would like clarification. Are we allowed to post classified documents on Wikipedia? This seems as though it may be an unwise practice, and there is an entirely separate wiki just for this type of stuff.

Also, assuming this type of "whistleblower"/"leaking"/"treason" is deemed acceptable on Wikipedia, how would one reference such documents? As they are, by design, guarded documents/images.

Specifically, I am asking about:

A reference to Tailored Access Operations in an XKeyscore slide

User:RobertJTurner

This discussion might interest you. Brycehughes (talk) 04:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

"simbarid" -- What?

In the "QUANTUM attacks" section of this page, an expoitable "module" listed is "simbarid," a redlinked page. In the source cited, the list is clear, reading something called "simbarUuid". Any Google search returns this with no result. Is there any clarification on this whatsoever that we can provide? It almost seems like listing cited gibberish and expecting people to understand. Possibly a classified program? Thanks,Neuropol^Talk 16:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Probably classified, feel free to remove stuff that cannot be cited with non-classified sources. Wikipedia sources do need to be 'published' at the very least, I don't think classified documents meet that threshold. PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)