I'm aware of the related questions, but in this post I'm not looking for a discussion, I'm looking to get this done. It's clear from our discussions on the DMZ over many months that the general opinion is supporting this. IT Security is just too narrow!

We've answered questions about blasting ATMs, stealing some documents from a storage unit, padlocks, shooting laser into cameras, protecting computers from a nuclear apocalypse, detecting CCTV cameras, and getting teenagers off our lawns. Every month we get paranoid about something new.

It's time that We become Security or at least Information Security. Later we can get Lockpicking and Privacy to merge in our tags (but that's for later in the future)

Let's get this done!

  • 1
    Other related question: meta.security.stackexchange.com/questions/1312/…
    – NULLZ
    Commented Aug 12, 2013 at 2:46
  • 2
    Yes indeed! Commented Aug 12, 2013 at 8:03
  • 14
    If the name is changed, then the logo will have to be modified; that would be a good occasion to replace the lion head with a more dignified animal, e.g. a bear.
    – Tom Leek
    Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 13:31
  • 2
    A bear with lazor eyez Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 17:45
  • Information Security will be better and broader. But the name of IT Security and it's corresponding URL is good. I forgot that, the logo is nice ever.
    – Mohsen Gh.
    Commented Aug 16, 2013 at 20:39

9 Answers 9


After discussing the discussion here and here, as well as the previous discussion discussed here we have decided to respect your collective wishes and rename this site to Information Security.

This change is on hold pending the availability of design resources to update logos and such; once done, we'll update the name as it appears in various text around the site and the network.

The URL will remain security.stackexchange.com.

...And this is done. Let me know if you run into something that looks odd.

  • 8
    You heard it here folks. Hang onto your IT Security swag since it'll soon become a collectors item.
    – Scott Pack
    Commented Oct 6, 2013 at 1:41
  • 2
    Two t-shirts and a bunch of stickers. I'll trade them for 4 billion dogecoins in a year.
    – Polynomial
    Commented Dec 22, 2013 at 3:52

It won't change what we do here, as we already have the wider scope as part of our remit, but i think Information Security would be my preference.

As the URL is suitable either way, really all that would be required to change this would be a slight revision of the logo and graphic materials, and adding a synonym of sec for itsec where it occurs.

  • 2
    I concur. I had no intentions or thoughts about modifying our scope, I love it the way it is. The whole point of this is that our scope is bigger than our title, and that's why I suggested modifying the latter. Graphics can either be done by SE or they delegate it to one of our graphics-experienced members.
    – Adi
    Commented Aug 12, 2013 at 17:59
  • My name is Scott Pack and I approve and/or endorse this message.
    – Scott Pack
    Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 12:16
  • 3
    Thus spake the Bear: this is good. Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 13:32
  • Don't you mean "synonym of infosec for itsec"?
    – Iszi
    Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 14:36
  • Nope. There are places where itsec is used (url shortcuts etc) so you would want to ensure that sec could also be used.
    – Rory Alsop Mod
    Commented Aug 13, 2013 at 15:24
  • 2
    +1, though as an American, I had to look up the meaning of remit in this context.... and I found it way down at #19 the last entry that says chiefly british Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 3:45

I agree that we our broader than just pure IT Security and that the scope preferably should be widened to Information Security. Should we choose just Security I'd like to know where we draw the line of what is on or off topic (Security is a broad term).


We have renamed sites in the past when it became clear that their scope has either changed significantly or that the name was actively harmful. The most notable change was probably Fitness & Nutrition becoming Physical Fitness. So, in principle, we're open to discussing the name change for this site as well. There are some technical considerations with doing that on a graduated site since the site design has to be adjusted to use the new name, but we can cross that bridge if/when we come to it. That isn't a showstopper in and of itself.

With that in mind, we discussed this specific proposal internally and we think "Information Security" would likely be a better name. However, it's not clear to us that there is strong consensus within the community here that supports it or that "Information Security" would definitely reflect the scope of the site in the long term.

I personally favour "Information Security" over a much broader "Security". I think you guys should be careful to avoid expanding your scope so much that anything and everything that's related to some type of security would become on-topic here. You want to maintain a reasonably narrow focus so that you keep attracting and keeping experts in that topic. If you start mashing together too many things that sound similar but actually have very little audience overlap (for example, most IT security specialists are likely not into picking physical locks), you risk fracturing your site to the point where it's just not going to maintain a cohesive community.

We aren't going to make any name changes right now. We'd like you guys to take more time to discuss where you see this site heading. This meta post is a start, and it includes a few examples of questions that aren't a fit with "IT", but we need to see a more clear consensus and direction before we proceed.

  • 2
    As for the "Information Security" vs "Security" debate, there is a specific question in which it was further discussed.
    – Tom Leek
    Commented Sep 13, 2013 at 17:16
  • 3
    I'm sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you. We do have a general agreement on "Information Security" vs "Security". The vast majority of the community is for "Information Security". Just because Gilles and I want "Security", it doesn't break the consensus. I'm ready to completely remove my point of view regarding "Security" just so it can't be used a justification. Other than that, what kind of agreement are guys hoping to see? As far as I can see, we do have a consensus and we do have a clear vision of where the site is heading.
    – Adi
    Commented Sep 16, 2013 at 14:41

I prefer the name Security. It's short and sweet, it's what we already have in the URL. And we often call the site “Security Stack Exchange” already anyway.

Our focus may be on information security, but that's partly a historical accident (this site started out with a strong predominance of network security, and a gradual shift towards more application security via web applications where the twain meet), and partly a bias that any community website is dominated by people who work in computer-related fields. We accept questions about safes when they're used to store backup tapes, so why not accept exactly the same question if the safe contains diamonds?

Any subject good enough for Bruce Schneier should be good enough for us. [Goes off to post a question about squid biology.]

Ross Anderson's book Security Engineering is also a good topic guide. Here's a sample of topics that it covers:

  • Concepts and theory: protocols, access control, multilevel security, …
  • Information security: cryptography, emission security, bookkeeping, printing, seals, …
  • Non-IT topics: economics, justice, nuclear control, …

So let's not replace “IT Security” by “Information security” which is a lot longer and dwarfs the word security by what is at worst a secondary concern and at best irrelevant. Make the official name Security. Just drop IT.

Besides, when I see “IT SECURITY”, I tend to read the first word as a pronoun. It what? It securities? Security of it? Oh, eye-tee security. Yeah, right. Just call it “Security”.

  • 1
    Security makes sense for us on the inside. For everyone else, security means the guy on a segway making sure kids don't skateboard on Mall stairs. Information Security. Or if you want to align with the US Govt, Cyber Security. Commented Aug 20, 2013 at 19:45
  • @Sid This is a professional site, so what matters is what the name evokes to professionals, not to Joe in the street. Joe would frequent sites like Seasoned Advice, Gardening & Landscaping or Super User — oh, well, two out of three ain't bad, right? Commented Aug 20, 2013 at 19:51
  • 1
    True, I thought that way too. But honestly, I later had to reword my introductions to folks in business, policy and communications just to clarify. It's much smoother then the semantics of the name get out of the way of confusion. Commented Aug 20, 2013 at 19:56

I personally support this idea. Especially since the Lock-picking site doesn't seem to be going anywhere fast!


+1 Security is amorphous and panoptic.

Discussing a limited portion of it is like discussing the choice of hinge-material in this gate:

enter image description here

  • 2
    Great opening of the Security field.
    – dan
    Commented Aug 23, 2013 at 18:53

I'm for a broadening of the name to sometime like Information Security as long as it shouldn't change what we already do here. I would, however, stay FAR away from calling it just Security. Far too many times, when I've told people I worked in Security, they assumed I'm a private security agent (aka Bodyguard).

Most folks within the InfoSec community make the mental connection but for everyone else 'outside' the industry, Security = Cop/Body Guard/Private Security Agent.

Following the recent direction of US Federal agencies, "Cyber" is making a comeback with Cyber Security. However, I know most non-policy (engineering) people dislike the word "Cyber".


I have no problem with using Information Security since it allows:

  • Implementation code pertaining to security (Bouncy Castle, exploits, etc)

  • Process, procedures, and physical security of databases, domain controllers etc.

  • The always fun, compliance and audit questions

It's a broad scope, but skilled professionals on this site already have an interest or background in all these areas, so moving forward with a rename to "Info Sec" is good.

I come from a long and varied IT Security background, which includes all the items listed above. Renaming the site to Information Security does make it less "corporate" from my perspective, but shouldn't distract from what we are doing today.

I do wonder if there is any effect in removing the "IT" part of the name, and if it will change the quality of technical expertise and questions we have on the site. I have no idea what the outcome, and I can't even bet if that would be for better or worse.

aside: Does that mean our new short form name is ISec.Se?

aside 2: Does that mean we will get new t-shirts and pens?

  • 2
    The short name came from the domain name, which will stay the same, so Sec.SE will stay. The t-shirts have the URL (which will stay the same).
    – Adi
    Commented Aug 15, 2013 at 10:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .