Talk:Lapsus$

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computer security: Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer securityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer securityTemplate:WikiProject Computer securityComputer security Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance). Things you can help WikiProject Computer security with: How you can help: Add to your watchlist the project talk page! Post there for help with articles or to suggest articles that need work. Request editing suggestions on your talk page by entering WikiProject_Computer_security into this template. Check the article alerts to participate in deletion discussions, review Good Article nominees, and review draft articles. Edit any articles that interest you. Recommended: Most popular articles that need the most work (last refreshed 1 August 2026) Popular articles (monthly top articles by views) High-importance stub-quality articles High-importance start-quality articles Mid-importance stub-quality articles Mid-importance start-quality articles Unknown-importance stub-quality articles Unknown-importance start-quality articles Review changes to popular articles or changes to talk pages. Replace deprecated archival service links. Recategorize articles in Category:Security to more specific categories Fix something on the list of articles that need cleanup, including: Clarification needed Rewrite needed Expansion needed Style editing needed Update needed Orphaned (add links from other articles to these articles) Conflict of interest Original research Promotional tone Biographies of living persons (BLP) articles lacking sources Cites no sources Cites unreliable sources Of the 3629 articles in this project 1995 or 55% are marked for cleanup, with 4039 issues in total. Editing resources: WikiProject Technology "generally reliable sources" list Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Technical language Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Computer science Brazil Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There are perhaps 7 known breaches. Options for representing these are perhaps prose, list or table.

Prose is easy to write, and great for narrative

Table is great when when we have similar data on each entry.

List is easy to scan, easy to write, but perhaps not as easy as table to compare attributes on each row.

What is most appropriate? Chumpih ^t 22:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

A table seems inappropriate for what is just "breach - date - info". Obviously if we want to set up a narrative prose is best; the way I wrote prose originally was weak and hard to read. Prose can work given a more experienced editor. List works for now, but a list comes off as a bit tacky IMO. My preference, in order, goes prose, list, and table. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Depending on the sourcing that's available, I think prose is better. There's been some major breaches, and some of the largest definitely deserve their own sections. Sideswipe9th (talk) 03:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

The current logo was added in Jan 2024 as part of a edit that was later undone. The only other copy of the image I can find is as the logo of a Telegram group. I have yet to confirm the group's legitimacy. It is possible the group is a copycat.

Unless someone can find a source for the current logo being the actual group's logo, I suggest it be removed. 2604:3D09:9279:9C00:A40E:EAB0:8844:10C3 (talk) 21:57, 18 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Similarly, a search using Google Lens's Image Search resulted in just the telegram channel. And I agree, there doesn't seem to be an obvious way to validate that channel. While the image is pretty anodyne and harmless, we shouldn't be including and giving credibility to content that can't be validated. Chumpih ^t 06:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Noticed it only has up to 2022 nothing newer then 2022 Isla🏳️‍⚧ 10:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

LAPSUS$ has not had much activity attributed to it since the arrest of several members in the last few years. It's widely though to be a part of 'The Com' ecosystem, so many of its members or attributed activity may be under other labels now, such as Scattered Spider. 2604:3D09:9279:9C00:E908:7229:6045:B48 (talk) 20:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, the recent Jaguar Land Rover cyberattack's apparent perps dubbed themselves Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters. But it might be tricky to demonstrate conclusively at this stage that ex-members of Lapsus$ were involved, although some sources suggest this as a possibility. Chumpih ^t 03:26, 25 September 2025 (UTC)Reply