WordPress.org

Ready to get started?Download WordPress

Forums

Please help Wikipedia think that WordPress is secure (7 posts)

  1. talgalili
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Hi all,
    I just went into the wiki article about WordPress:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordPress#Vulnerabilities
    And found a not so faltering review of WP security.

    Assuming the WP is secure (and I believe it is), can someone help in changing that? (I can't, since I don't have enough knowledge on the subject)

    Thanks,
    Tal

  2. ClaytonJames
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    A cursory glance at that article suggests that the synopsis of vulnerabilities is not necessarily inaccurate. I didn't really see anything I could enthusiastically disagree with right off the bat.

    That doesn't have to be a bad thing though!

    In fact, I think that you will find it reasonably safe to state that "all" blogging and CMS platforms have suffered from vulnerabilities throughout their histories. WordPress and the community at large seem to be very, very good at recognizing and responding to those issues and updating or patching is usually a quick process. The applications on which WordPress and many other publishing systems run are constant targets for exploitation themselves. The good thing is, as the community grows and the software matures, developers will continue refining things until in theory, the best possible combination of stability and features can be reached without compromising safety. And, of course, third party items such as themes and plugins, as well as the rapid introduction of new features, always opens the door a little bit for new opportunities to exploit.

    Assuming the WP is secure (and I believe it is)

    I do too. In as much as any web application can be secure. I think the best thing you can do is stay in touch with the issues, and make sure you do everything you can to secure your site. That means staying updated and learning how to best manage your web space and server, as well.

    There will always be people of questionable intent trying to do things they shouldn't be doing with other peoples web spaces. I doubt that will ever change. I always take wikipedia with a grain of salt. I use it as a quick link resource more than anything else.

  3. talgalili
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Hi there ClaytonJames,
    I think we are in agreement on all that you said, except for what that means for the article.

    You mention two things that the current wiki article doesn't state:
    1) the rate of fixing WP security issues.
    2) the relative place of WP security vs other systems security.

    If these could be quantified, I believe they will be of great value to that article (and to the continuing growth of the community)

    What do you think ?

  4. ClaytonJames
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    You mention two things that the current wiki article doesn't state:

    Because it's my first hand knowledge and experiences with WordPress, and this and other support sites, that lead me to those conclusions. I think it's a perfect example of why a wikipedia article (just my opinion) should never be considered authoritative in nature.

    If these could be quantified, I believe they will be of great value to that article (and to the continuing growth of the community)

    What do you think ?

    I have no personal interest what-so-ever in what wikipedia has to offer. But it appears that anyone with a passion for that sort of thing is welcome to participate.

    "Anyone with internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles. There are no requirements to provide one's real name when contributing; rather, each writer's privacy is protected unless they choose to reveal their identity themselves...
    ...Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute. Wikipedia's intent is to have articles that cover existing knowledge, not create new knowledge."

    Source

    Best wishes!

  5. Marie-Aude
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    As ClaytonJames stated, Wikipedia does not accept opinions, but only facts backed up by external sources.

    The article lists facts, and rather old ones. I'd say that if end of 2009 there had been no security problem with WordPress since end of 2007, it is even a golden record.

  6. vangrog
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Being serious and brief, Wikipedia isn't at all a content and information source which I feel can respect.

  7. talgalili
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Everyone,
    I agree with you that Wikipedia is far less then a perfect enterprise for knowledge.
    BUT, it has power and influence, and as such should be respected.

    For your review, here is the number of views for the "wordpress" article:
    http://stats.grok.se/en/200911/wordpress
    A bit over a 1000 people a day.
    I would say that is an article to consider taking seriously.

    Now, I am not going to fix the article. I don't have the knowledge (e.g: references) to justify claims.
    But if one of you can, and wants to - it might help out the general public.

    Best,
    Tal

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic