To simplify voting I will post my suggested solution here as an answer instead of as part of the question.
I think we should keep nfc as the main tag, and make the other a synonym. Three letter abbrivations are annoying, but in this case I think the term NFC is much more well established than near field communication.
We can move the tag excerpt from near-...
As Gilles said we should probably look at tools
149 questions, but I'm not sure it's really useful as well. Mostly used whenever someone wants something to do some kind of job for them. Also it's usually redundant with the function tag that comes alongside (like encryption tools) or with the tool name (e.g. wireshark tools).
I'd suggest we need both as all phones are not necessarily smartphones. In fact all the disaster folks I work with use non-smartphones (such as the Nokia 6210i) specifically as they do not require the same sort of infrastructure as smartphones, so will still work in major disasters. Also, their battery life is weeks rather than days.
The security ...
I agree with @RoryAlsop here. Let's keep the main tag csrf and let cross-site-request-forgery be a synonym, just in case.
Just as with SQL, which is rarely ever called "Structured Query Language", we should stick to the usage that's most common. XSS and CSRF are well-established acronyms that keep the tag list concise.
I'm against that change, because frankly, I think it doesn't improve anything. I think it's virtue signalling at best, showing "we're doing something" without actually doing anything substantial or impactful.
If you have a look at the systemic problems that black people in the US and elsewhere face, the words "blacklist" are so far down ...
attacks looks like a pointless meta tag. Attack of what? I can't think of an instance where this tag would ever be correctly used by itself or be used to filter questions (which is the point of tags).
First of all, Kali is not "different" from Backtrack, it is the rebranded name for a new version of the same product (at least, to my understanding - it's not something I handle regularly. Please correct me if I'm wrong...)
In general, I tend to disagree with ALL requests for "my question is about [X], make me a tag [X]!" from new users.
First, because ...
I don't see a difference in usage. Some questions are even tagged with both.
Since ssl is a synonym for tls, and tags are preferably nouns, I'd suggest to merge them withtls-interception as a master and ssl-interception as a synonym.
Here are a few tags that I question their need:
ai and ads don't seem required at all.
regexp most-likely should be called "regex" (edit: looks like this is debatable, didn't know both were used), but also seems to be a waste of space.
Finally, I've been wondering this for a long time so I'm curious what you guys think about it. Doesn't tools somewhat ...
I can see scenarios where it would be useful to have them as separate tags, assuming we populate the deletion one, with destruction being used for physical items (hard drives, paper etc.) and deletion being reserved for intangibles (files and other data stored on electronic media), however depending on numbers this could also work just fine with one tag for ...
If a tag has no categorization usefulness, it should be removed. If a clearly bad tag is used by only one question, you as a 2K+ user can strike it out of existence yourself. (Users without the edit privilege must fix all problems with posts they edit, in addition to removing useless tags. In my opinion, everyone should completely repair all posts they touch,...
I think we should split the tag.
I agree. I propose using disk-image for forensic sector-for-sector copies of a storage medium.
Since the bulk of the questions are about "depictions of visual perceptions" (credit to Wikipedia for that nice description) and not disk images, the image tag should probably retain that meaning.
While that is a good ...
On another SE, I would say "no". But on Information Security, I think the answer is "yes".
The notion of "deleting information", in a security context, implies - or should imply - securely deleting that information.
Absolutely agree, it is pointless and not a good path to go down. I think it was added out of anger, towards an apparently deceitful OP who was trying to "put one over on us". Understandable, but still not something we would want to condone, and allow to be misused. Removed.
Microsoft does more than make products. They have security expertise, they have services and documents. Their product decisions affect the industry as a whole.
I immediately agreed with you when I read your question, but those companies are more than the sum of their parts. I can see a case for keeping them and for removing them.
As with the OWASP tag, if ...
Please update your post with links to ones that you think need it. We can then review, and if it is useful, we can add that tag.
The caveat here is, "if it is useful."
Creating tags that don't help out and aren't needed actually negatively impacts the site, so let's see if this tag is going to help.
Is there a subset of security questions that would benefit from the software tag? If not, I agree with you that we should nuke it. I'll get a full look through, but right now I think you are right.
Hardware works well as a tag, I think.
My impression after a non-exhaustive review:
secure is totally meaningless on this site and can and should be nuked.
protection is sometimes meaningful but is not a good tag name. The tag should be removed from the site, but on about half questions that have it, it should be replaced by some other tag such as defense, access-control, integrity, etc.
I must admit I felt a bit offended when I read the title of your question. :-) Not sure I will produce a solid answer though.
Tags makes questions searchable. The word time might show up in a lot of questions, but very few of them actually deals with the concept of time as it is defined in the tag excerpt (by you, in an excellent, recent edit). Explicitly ...
NO! x.509 != certificates.
Closely related, for sure, but:
certificates is not a subset of x.509 because, for example, e-passports use the EAC format for certificates.
x.509 is not a subset of certificates because the authoritative X.509 spec is held by the ITU-T as the X.500 LDAP authentication framework. Even within internet use, RFC 5280 also covers ...
No, this tag should not be deleted. Just because blackberries are obsolete doesn't mean that there can't be questions about it. In general, deleting a tag should only be done if there are good reasons to do so.
Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? And Is it unambiguous?
blackberry fulfills both of these. It's pretty clear ...