[Foundation-l] Open proxy robotical blocking

Sat Apr 29 22:59:16 UTC 2006

Thanks for your feedback Jan.

Yes, you put your finger on it. I invited Egg to discuss the issue on 
wikitech. But for now, I see no posting on the issue.

Ant

Jan Kulveit wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:38:57PM +0200, Anthere wrote:
> ...
> 
>>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions#Desysopping_of_cs:Wikipedista:Egg
>>
>>Whether technically possible or not technically possible, Proxybot was 
>>both a sysop and a bot on the cs.wikipedia.
>>His activity is to block ips : 
>>http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciální%3ALog&type=block&user=Proxybot&page=
>>
>>Is that suitable that a bot also has a sysop status ?
>>
>>Ant
>>
> 
> 
> I think several aspects should be separated 
> -technical implementation & mediawiki issues (problems with cluttering of logs etc.)
> -questions od accuracy of open proxy detection, if such blocks can be
> automated
> -should open proxies be blocked just because beeing open proxies? 
> 
> I hope Egg (creator of Proxybot) will post something about the bot in 
> wikitech-l, in Requests_for_permissions also another solution was
> proposed, to import the blacklist directly into db. I hope this
> will be discussed in wikitech-l
>  
> What seems to me as relevant topic for Foundation-l are the policy questions
> 
> 1. should open proxies be blocked?
> some possible answers
> a. yes
> b. only after they are source of vandalism
> c. no, they should be treated as normal ips
> d. it should be left to local communities of language versions / projects to
> decide
> 
> As we have a "WikiProject on open proxies" 
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:OP
> and
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:NOP
> no open proxies policy
> the answer seems to be "yes", but see complains at
> [[en:Wikipedia talk:No open proxies#Foundation Issue Violation]]
> 
> 2. can such blocks be automated?
> a. yes
> b. yes, if the list was verified by hand by experienced users
> c. yes, if the list was verified by trusted script run by trusted user
> d. yes, if the list comes from reputable source (is meta: page a reputable
> source?)
> e. no, it should be checked by hand one by one
> f. no
> g. it should be left to local communities of language versions / projects to
> decide
> 
> In my opinion trusted proxycheck script run by trusted user is
> resonable. Scripts tend to err on side of caution (if I play with nmap
> etc. I'm able to identify more proxies  simple script is).
> 
> My thought on the topic - if http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:NOP is
> official Foundation policy, it would make sense to have Wikimedia-wide
> ip blacklist, blocking proxies. One-by-one blocks by hand by admins of 
> individual projects are IMO waste of time. That isn't a problem on en: 
> with its overwhelming manpower, but for smaller project dealing with open 
> proxy abuse may be non-negligeable burden. One technically savvy vandal 
> can occupy several checkusers and admins for indefinite time period: 
> all he has to do is to download some public open proxy list, run his
> own scan, and as soon as one proxy is blocked, switch to another.
> 
> If privacy policy is relatively strict and blocking policy relatively
> liberal (warn several times, block only after several repeated 
> vandalisms, if vandalizing edits are mixed with good edits, talk more,
> use RfC etc.) time impact on wiki users vs. vandal plays in favour 
> of vandal.
> 
> Jan Kulveit - User:Wikimol