<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.lockwiki.com/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Category_talk%3ASurreptitious_Entry</id>
	<title>Category talk:Surreptitious Entry - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.lockwiki.com/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Category_talk%3ASurreptitious_Entry"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.lockwiki.com/index.php?title=Category_talk:Surreptitious_Entry&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-05-11T18:52:41Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.38.5</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.lockwiki.com/index.php?title=Category_talk:Surreptitious_Entry&amp;diff=1609&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Datagram at 06:15, 13 January 2009</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.lockwiki.com/index.php?title=Category_talk:Surreptitious_Entry&amp;diff=1609&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2009-01-13T06:15:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;Mcm,&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
I think we should remove the &amp;#039;examples of&amp;#039; portion, because this is a category page, not an article. I put this page here until we have a dedicated S.E. page, so just the definition is fine; once articles get added they will show below and people can find their own examples. Alternatively, we can have a short list on a main S.E. page, should one be created, similar to how general lockpicking/destructive entry techniques are mentioned on their respective pages.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;I&amp;#039;d also like to modify the definition to remove &amp;quot;or otherwise&amp;quot; because this is a bit all encompassing, and if something was stolen it technically is in defiance of &amp;quot;or otherwise.&amp;quot; The main idea is that surreptitious is a step up from covert because it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it was actually used, unless tools/etc can be linked to someone. It doesn&amp;#039;t necessarily mean that there is no evidence, just that it would not be discernable to a qualified investigator.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;-dg, 01.12.09&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Datagram</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>