Re: [Wikimedia-l] CheckUser openness

2012-06-15 Thread Stephanie Daugherty
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Two points that might help bring people on different sides of the
 issue closer together.

 1. How about notifying people that they have been check-usered 2
 months after the fact? By that time I hope all investigations are
 complete, and is the risk of tipping off the nefarious should be over.

 That's an interesting concept, and I'd think this would be the only way to
notify users without compromising the effectiveness of the tool, but I
still have serious reservations about disclosure here for reasons
previously cited and below. Also, there are conceivably complex abuse cases
where an investigation would take longer than 2 months, particularly in the
sort of cases that eventually end up before en.wiki's arbcom.



 2. Though the strategies of when to checkuser and how to interpret the
 results are private, the workings of CheckUser are not. It is free
 software, and its useage described at
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CheckUser I would imagine any
 tech-savy user with malicioius intent will check how CheckUser can be
 used to detect their malicious editing, and what means they have to
 avoid detection. Notifying someone they have been checkusered does not
 give them any information they didn't have already, apart from being
 under investigation.


The privacy rules surrounding it are very much public as well. That makes
the effectiveness of checkuser as a tool very much dependent on
carelessness or ignorance of person targeted, things we want to preserve as
much as possible lest checkuser stop being effective or massive relaxation
of privacy policies become necessary to preserve its effectiveness.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] CheckUser openness

2012-06-15 Thread Stephanie Daugherty


 Am I correct to summorise here than that CU works because people don't
 know it doesn't?

 Almost. It works because people don't know how, don't care how, or don't
think they are attracting enough attention to avoid being targeted.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] CheckUser openness

2012-06-14 Thread Stephanie Daugherty
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:36 AM, David Richfield
davidrichfi...@gmail.comwrote:

 So User:mfgaowener should get an automated mail saying because you
 did a pagemove with edit summary Haers! you were checkusered.
 Please be more subtle in your vandalism next time.

 I trust the current checks and balances, and I don't think the system
 is getting significant levels of abuse.

 +1 on this. The methods that checkusers have are heavily constrained as it
is by privacy concerns, and they are very fragile. They only work
effectively within the tight privacy restrictions with a certain amount of
security through obscurity. For one, a checkuser needs to be able to
monitor a situation sometimes to be sure that they are casting a wide
enough net for a block to be effective. For another, the standard of
reasonable suspicion placed on the checkuser tool is high enough that with
enough practice, vandals would learn to be careful to never justify a
checkuser request within the privacy guidelines.

We're between a rock and a hard place, because to give the transparency
being asked for, we'd enter an arms race where we'd quickly have to relax
the checkuser standards to the point where it becomes anything goes so
long as you don't disclose it.

-Stephanie
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Watchlist email notifications enabled on all wikis

2012-04-27 Thread Stephanie Daugherty
Automatically adjusting the email frequency might be a worthwhile feature
to strive for:
If an editor hasn't logged in within the past 30 days, revert to monthly
digest, that way we don't drive editors away with the email frequency.

-Stephanie


On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:07 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Victor Vasiliev vasi...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Please, do not enable this feature by default. A lot of people do not
  like  10 emails/day in their mailbox, and I have such amount of
  watchlisted edits even in smaller projects like Meta.

 A daily digest would be cool.

 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30187

 --
 John Vandenberg

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l