Talk:L0pht

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Members[edit]

The members section of this page is easily the most vandalized. A lot of people 'hacked at the L0pht' like, a lot. It was a pretty open space, especially during parties and what not. However actual members only numbered around 11 and over the eight or so years of L0pht's existence it only had about 7 members at any one time. It is these few people who actually helped pay the rent and had a say in the weekly meetings. Saying someone 'hacked at the L0pht' or went to a L0pht party or even had a shell account on the L0pht.com box did NOT make them 'members of the L0pht'.

2018.07.10 - Once again we are starting to see vandalism in this section. Probably due to the upcoming Defcon talk. Any additions to the membership list should be supported by strong valid citations. If the citation reads 'hacked at', 'partied at', 'hung out at', that does not equal 'member of'. - E

Dues[edit]

Ya know I hate editing this page myself but people keep posting inacurate information. We never accepted dues. We did take donations of old hardware but not in exchange for membership or anything. We did sell stuff but that didn't make people a member anymore than buying a quater pounder makes you a member of McDonalds. - SR
OK, not sure who put the dues crap back in thier but we NEVER accepted DUES! - SR

spelling of name[edit]

The name is L (zero) p h t. I don't know what that stupid big O is but it is not a zero. The reason we put the slash in the logo was so that people would know it was a zero and lot a letter O. In the early days we didn't have the lOpht.com domain so we had to make sure people knew it was a zero. Who is it that is claiming to have known me for 10 years? I don't think I have known anyone for 10 years. Send me email already. Anyway I added some minor edits to the page. We recently got back the lopht.com domian (with an Oh) and there is a place holder page up there. - SR

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.19.242.167 (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Isn't their name L0pht rather than LØpht? I was under the impression that the slash across the zero in their logo is because that's how zeroes are rendered in some typewriter fonts, not because it's an Ø. --Delirium 17:35, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

OMG it's the attack of the twits.
I think you're right. It was recently changed to the Ø. It looks correct, but it is not correct, afaik. --Myles Long 18:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, moved back to L0pht. --Delirium 04:48, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
Should we change all LØpht to L0pht on the page? --Easyas12c 11:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! The name is 'LØpht'. The Ø is from a typerwriter ( teletype, ASR-33 ) font, A deritive of ITC Souviner. That Chukka-chukka you used to hear on the evening news? That was it. Althought it may have recently been changed to 'LØpht' from 'L0pht', It sould remain 'LØpht'. I have known SpaceRogue for 10+ years.
'deritive'? 'typerwriter'? 'Souviner'? Wow. 'L0pht' is intentionally illiterate. This isn't. Wiki strives to be literate. Give Wiki a break. And I trust SR - if he says he doesn't know you he doesn't. Somebody's on drugs here. Bad ones at that.


yOU FORGOT TO Mention that they also used to have an office in downtown Bethesda Maryland when they were renamed as @Stake.

I am shocked by the stupidity of these comments. Technically incorrect, historically incorrect, factually incorrect - and educationally somewhat below the generous low end par of a slow 3 year old preschooler. Thus I feel sorry for the doyens of L0pht who get to be treated in this pedestrian fashion by these warts.

company category[edit]

I thikn this entry should be listed under 'Hacker groups" if there is a such a catagory. We didn;t really become a company until after the merger with @Stake.

Would Category:Companies of the United States be appropriate for the article?

(or a sub category of Category:Companies of the United States by state instead, if someone knows the state.)

--Easyas12c 09:55, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The state was Massachusetts. --Myles Long 15:48, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

L0pht was incorporated as LHI Technologies in the Commonwealth of MA. It showed a profit prior to @stake's purchase. It was a business.

Where are the old LØpht members now? do they still work for Symantec? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.148.80 (talk) 12:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of them are at Symantec anymore, no. They'll be having a reunion at a security conference in Boston in March, no doubt there'll be updates in the press on their current activities when that happens.Scalefree (talk) 18:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Camneerg[edit]

Yeah it was Greenmac backwards but I guess that part has been deleted from the page anyway.

observation that may suggest a corection since i know next to nothing about this topic i will not make a change myself.


the part that says: Hence the name was 'Camneerg' or 'Macgreen' backwards.

should say: Hence the name was 'Camneerg' or 'GreenMac' backwards.

I noticed that too. I'll go ahead and change this... misternuvistor 09:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

L0pht used to have a program where people could make donations and have an associate membership. Please do not remove the blurb about it. Rewrite it if it sux but don't remove it completely, because it's a true fact. I know that Desperado, Archangel, and others from the alt.2600 group used to have such memberships. If anyone disputes this, please discuss it here before removing the content. I doubt if anyone actually wants to rewrite history, it's just one of those little footnotes that is easy to miss. Matt Brennen 02:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of rewriting history. Find a source that proves it (other than "some guys on alt.2600 say so"). --Myles Long 04:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At various times a number of people were given accounts on the l0pht.com shell box. I guess some of them may have paid money for that, but none of them (paid or not) would ever have been considered "members" in any sense.

Scalefree 01:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scalefree you are correct. Matt Brennen you are wrong. I'm Space Rogue, I was a member of the L0pht, I should know. People could not buy memberships. Period. I don't know who those two people are you mentioned, never heard of them. Desperado and Archangel may have had accounts on the l0pht.com box, (it has been so long it is hard to remember) but they were not members of L0pht in any shape or form. No different than buying a shell account from someone today, doing so does NOT make you a memeber of thier organization. Myles Long, you are correct, find a primary source that can refute the testimony of someone who was there (ME) and I will let the content stand and stop deleteing it. But since it is you Matt who are attempting to rewrite history the comments will be deleted. If you want to discuss offline email me spacerog AT spacerogue DOT net. - SR

OK, I added a bunch of stuff about products and shell accounts. I hope that clears things a bit. Again, if you have questions email me. - SR

Please read what I wrote. I never said dues. I said paid memberships. The fact is that it is a part of L0pht's history that people had accounts as you discribe above, and it needs to be mentioned. Trying to act like it never happened is wrong. You just admitted that these memberships (or whatever you want to call them) existed, so it needs to be put out there, and not covered up, that's all I'm saying. Matt Brennen 04:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've written a version which will satisfy everyone. Matt Brennen 04:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no, that doesn't satisfy anything. Cite a source. --Myles Long 04:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My objection is your insistance that someone who purchased a shell account and had an email address was somehow a "full-blown" member. My definition of 'member' is someone who had a physical desk in the physical l0pht space, assisted with paying the rent, participated in our weekly meetings, etc... A member is NOT somone who had an email address or an account on the box. Such account holders had ZERO input on how the L0pht was run, made no comments regarding group decisions etc... Basically such people were customers, thats it, they were not members. - SR
I don't recall saying ANYONE was a full-blown member. I don't care if they were called members, associates, customers, or suckers. In fact, I don't even care enough about the issue to have an edit war, which is what this is slowly turning into, so I won't edit it again. If the ex-L0pht members here wish to keep erasing the ENTIRE blurb, rather than correct it, or suggest something different, and act like it never took place, let them. It's not my credibility at stake, so I don't care. I'm just saying these were things that really happened. L0pht members have confirmed it right here in this thread, yet nobody wants anything written about it on the main page. Whatever. Seriously I don't care. I didn't mean to get everyone's hackles up about a minor footnote in L0pht history. For some reason I actually thought that our heroes at L0pht would be happy to assist and help with the blurb by maybe adding to it, not fighting it. But I didn't realize you guys were writing your own private history here. So, with that I'll be moving along, and work on a page where additional facts are welcome and expanded. I'll have this page on my watchlist for another week or so, I encourage anyone here to prove me wrong by writing about the accounts/memberships worded however you want, tho I doubt anyone will. Matt Brennen 04:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember to WP:AGF. I wasn't a part of L0pht, and I don't have any sort of vested interest. All I'm saying is that you should cite a source for your claims. I know people that weren't members of the group had shell accounts and/or email addresses on the l0pht.com box, and there's no reason that shouldn't be in the article. However, a source should be cited stating that, and it needs to be more than "some guys from alt.2600 say so." --Myles Long 15:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reunion Panel at SOURCE Boston[edit]

It's happing right now as I type this. Although I was not able to attend SOURCE Boston, my Twitter feed has been feeding me little tidbits from this reunion of a few members of L0pht. The blog and news entries should show up over the weekend and I'll add them here. Is there a particular way anyone would like to see this attached to the main article?

I'll stay on the hunt for flickr streams and other assorted info.

SOURCEboston live blog with photo
http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=144609&WT.svl=news1_2
http://masshightech.bizjournals.com/masshightech/stories/2008/03/03/story8.html

Wintr (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting this, Wintr. I think the best way to incorporate the photos from Focal Intent (http://www.flickr.com/photos/focalintent/sets/72157604119313031/ focalintent's photos) might be to upload one of the photos of the panel and use it to illustrate the article. Tjarrett (talk) 00:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Citations Needed[edit]

How do you cite something when it was never written down? How are first person accounts cited? I would hate to edit the page myself but most of the stuff on the page that says 'citation needed' is only available in my head. - Space Rogue —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.160.76 (talk) 17:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I added some citations and re-added the members sections, hopefully with the proper cites. I'm sure I got the formats of the citations wrong so if you know how please fix thanks. Still unsure how to cite the stuff in my head. I'll keep looking for published interviews and stuff but they may not exist. - Space Rogue

The academic format for primary source citation is normally "Pers. Comm." with the date and other relevant information for the communication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.82.52.4 (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NFR[edit]

At the end of the paragraph of "Products" one may read: "custom security coding for companies like NFR.[8][9]". I don't know what NFR is, and I therefore think that it should be linked to its corresponding article. (NFR is not enough) /Tense (talk) 11:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL WUT? --15.219.153.76 (talk) 02:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non notable?[edit]

Im wondernig why this page is on Wikipedia. I stumbled over it, and it is totally incrompehensible to me what this group did, and why it is worthy of a wp entry. i guess that it should be clear from the entry, but that just says its been famous, without reference. -- eiland (talk) 17:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hacker "think tank"?[edit]

I'm not sure about the accuracy or neutrality of this term. Is there even such a thing as a "hacker think tank"? -- OlEnglish (Talk) 01:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

l0pht is back[edit]

If you noticed, l0pht is back up and running, 6 of the original 8 have come back at DEFCON. Portalcake (talk) 12:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Portalcake[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on L0pht. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on L0pht. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on L0pht. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:27, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maintenance template removal - Additional citations needed[edit]

The current Maintenance template claiming additional citations need is from 2008. The page now has over 35 separate cites. Any objections to removing this template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatoz (talk • contribs) 20:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wives?[edit]

Looks like an anonymous editor added the names of two of the groups wives to the first paragraph of the history section but without a citation. Would appreciate a link confirming this information.


@Eatoz: Mary is cited in this: 'We Got to Be Cool About This': An Oral History of the L0pht, Part 1

Alicia was married to Count Zero (John Lester) in case that helps. I'm having a hard time finding references to her. I believe they divorced in the mid 1990s. I didn't know her very well.

Stefan01902 (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mudge is Twitter Whistle-blower.[edit]

Mudge is Twitter Whistle-blower and testified to Senate Judiciary Sept 13, 2022. I propose that fact be added to this page. 2600:1700:A6A0:5AF0:66F1:C04C:F1F6:A854 (talk) 20:55, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:L0pht&oldid=1208067474"