I might have a problem with someone asking about a previously unknown remotely exploitable vulnerability in really common product like Windows, Linux or something.
I don't see any value in trying to hide information that is extremely easy to be found and is common knowlege to almost every sysadmin. Telling someone that they can use a tool to change the password to a machine if they have physical access really doesn't come close to being something that should or can be suppressed for security reasons.
This is a site for sysadmins, I think we should share any and all information here that a sysadmin may commonly experience.
Having an account locked out is pretty common. Someone at work just managed to need to use this yesterday, when a computer account was deleted when it shouldn't have been, the local admin password was not the standard, and cached credentials where disabled. It is not like a remote exploit, you require physical access to use these tools. Trying to pretend that a user which has physical access to a machine doesn't have the ability to do whatever they are capable of doing to the box is kinda silly in my mind.
On a related point, I am also not that worried about firewall/filter bypass questions which are also somewhat common. Any firewall setup where security matters also will include a good deal of logging of traffic that what was permitted. If someone does get out when they shouldn't their activity should be in a log that is reviewed by the firewall admin anyway.
It's my opinion that we should not be
encouraging the use of tools or
methods which we would object to
someone using on our own
This is a site for system administrators to answer questions for system administrators. Given no evidence to the contrary my default assumption when answering a question is that I am talking to a system administrator who is asking a question about administering a system they are responsible for.
I usually don't want my users to be running nmap, but I am not talking one of my users when I am answering a question here I am talking to a system administrator perfoming their duty.
Following a strict version of your statement I think would mean that we shouldn't discuss anything having to do with any sysinternals tool, regedit, scripting, command prompt, nmap, tcpdump, debugging, running hexedit, etc. If you where to build an exhastive list of all the things we couldn't discuss because it could be abused I think you would find that there would be a lot less on-topic questions left.
I think any type of censoring a discussion about a tool that a system administrator may use in the normal course of their work is silly and counter-productive if we wish to be a good source of questions ans answers for everything sysadmin.
I want system administrators to be properly informed about how to use tools with a potential for destruction. I don't want ignorant sysadmins mis-using a tool and trashing their own network because they don't have a place to discuss th proper usage of the tools.
Answering a question about a sysadmin tool is not mean to encourage abuse. If the question is clearly intend to be about abusing a network instead something may ask then vote to close it as off-topic, downvote it, and/or add a comment to the question informing the asker that you don't think their question is related to system administration.
If a superuser can abuse my network because of something they read here, so what? They could have read about the tool somewhere else and learned the same thing. I don't care about the non-sysadmin user that may read this site. I am here to talk to people interested in system administration.