Mark Buffalo worked up some canonical PHP malware answers with the process for analysis for the sole purpose of addressing this issue. We should point people to these questions (my internet on vacation is way too slow to search for them).
The problem with these questions is the narrow scope. The answer really only benefits the asker.
We have 2 canonical questions for home PCs and Servers that we usually use to close new questions as a duplicate of:
Help! My home PC has been infected by a virus! What do I do now?
How do I deal with a compromised server?
But we are also seeing a lot of just ...
It seems to me as though the answers in that question are actually really useful, particularly to anyone else facing a similar issue.
So what is the actual harm to this community?
If people can get value from the question and answers and there are people happy to provide clear answers, shouldn't this be encouraged?
I agree though that if a question is ...
"When will a vendor implement a new feature?" is not a great question, even if the answer has security implications. Until the information is made public, all we can do is opine.
If there was a member of the vendor's dev staff willing to answer, they would either have to:
break confidentiality (not something we would want to encourage)
disclose something ...
I think the question @schroeder recommended is a great canonical question.
But, and this is a big but: Just because we got ourself a fancy new hammer, we should not be fooled to believe that every question is a nail and hit the close button without thinking twice about it first:
Is the question not about what the malware does, but what should be done with ...
Could you please explain me... how a question about an extension, used
for tampering data by many of security experts, is not related to a QA
site on Information Security.
If that question has to do about the security aspects of the extension, then it would be on-topic. However, if the question is only about installing it - or why it doesn't function ...
The problem is if there was an algorithm that could be reliably employed and could be captured in an Answer, then we would not have a phishing problem as email servers could use the algorithm to prevent the emails. I've looked into this a lot over the years. There is no clear technical answer on how to determine if an email is a phish or not.
The answers ...
The "difficulty" is entirely up to how the application was designed and what resources they have to analyse player behavior. That makes the question too broad and up to interpretation. One game will be easy, while another will be difficult.
Once you put in the LoL example, then it becomes about LoL, and only LoL staff can answer your question. If you ...
I think one of the reasons why you are getting poor responses is that your question is not very focused. You might get the same type of responses here.
This is what you have said:
Prospective vendor has non-standard report
You are not sure if you are being overly critical of the vendor
How do you communicate caution without making accusations?
I agree, that question really is on-topic.
Programming-specific is never a problem, as long as it is primarily about security - the overwhelming majority of security-related issues are currently programming specific.
It might be that it was closed because the original version of the question was a bit confused, and enforced assumptions that are wrong. The ...
The OP was asking about the internals of a programming language. I think the question was close-voted because the way integers are stored and overflow is not primarily a security topic, although it can have security implications. In its current form, that question could have been answered correctly by a C programmer without any knowledge of security concepts....
Part of the problem is that most questions in that pattern are too broad to be able to point them to anywhere useful. If narrow enough, then the answers are pretty evident (or even answerable).
For example, in the cited case, www.corelan.be would be a great place for them to start. But what about someone wanting to learn the topics in the CCNA body of ...
I'm finding lot of new stuff on daily basis about security through stackoverflow questions. Definitely I will not search for these stuff unless I've an issue since that is not my field.
However the links like those referred in your question pops up in Hot network questions and helps me to be understand and aware of security methods need to be taken care ...
I have no idea if the question is answerable with a quick google or not, but I don't think that is the important part. Instead I think you should focus on the stated close reason:
This question does not appear to be about Information security within the scope defined in the help center.
Also, with my highlight, the explanation from the moderator who ...
I believe marking it as a duplicate is the best way to go.
The original poster gets enough information to make his own decision.
Subsequent viewers are directed to useful information.
Potential responders will not waste time reinventing the wheel.
In this case, we are fortunate to have a very well-written response. It would be a shame to let it go to waste....