and what I meant about "personal opinions"... I did not (and still don't) care about any given individual's feeling about this subject. It does not answer the question. Who decided to make this site called "serverfault", was it the community? Who decided it was for professionals? You really can't deny that certain security questions are related to our profession.

@Chris, regardless of anyone's opinion, systems security is not a "technicality". Systems People have been fired over break ins, and need to know the threats out there. In general you would hire a security auditor, but the fixes all fall on us.

I'd except any official answer, even if the answer is 100% the discretion of the moderating community. It seems it would serve everyone the best to have something explaining. I appologize for any misunderstanding, I might not understand how this whole stackexchange thing works. Which again could be served best by having something about it in the FAQ. (which I have read, and IMO is lacking on the flagging and bad answer section)

@Chris S, we should be able to have those "process and procedures" defined. Even if I don't like the answer, I'd want it from serverfault.com or stack exchange. what is acceptable and what is not, and what to do about it, should be clearly defined. Personal opinions from the community, and self righteous moderators, are just opinions. I don't believe, because you have reputation for providing quality answers, you should get to decide "process and procedure". moderating in general is done for the benefit of site. the site needs to define what that benefit looks like.

@John Gardenier, you forget that breaking in someone's else system sometimes is considered a profession.

If something is 100% illegal if performed as stated, I can see the point. Things that "Might" be illegal if performed, should be given the benefit of the doubt. More importantly, I personally, believe if something is not illegal for serverfault to publish, it should slide. Knowledge itself is w/ exception not illegal, I assume I don't need to provide the legal interpretation of the first.

What about system security???? I have definitely asked questions about subverting security to test my servers! I also could easily imagine IT themselves attempting to subvert IT. Should we make those cases explain themselves, who the hell are we other than sysadmin?