"lack of infrastructure" and lack of "current volunteers" weren't addressed in your email at all, given that you're relying upon wrong premises by assuming checkusers' bad faith and non-existing practices.
Vito Il giorno sab 23 apr 2022 alle ore 19:58 Lane Chance <zinkl...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 at 15:17, Rae Adimer via Wikimedia-l < > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: > >> Hi Lane, >> >> I would appreciate if you could take the time to learn about an issue >> before holding strong, accusatory opinions about it. >> > > Maybe reading the facts in my email would be a good starting point. Your > response has not refuted any of those facts, in fact as a checkuser you no > doubt could confirm exactly how many times in the past checkuser tools have > been misused and how they are still open to being misused. > > >> gIPBE is granted to people in China and other areas where they want to >> use proxies for security reasons. A significant portion of current gIPBEs >> are for people in China. The issue here is not people being declined gIPBE, >> it’s the sheer amount of people who need it and the lack of infrastructure >> for current volunteers to handle those requests. >> > > Declining was not mentioned and is not the issue. Alternatives for "lack > of infrastructure" and lack of "current volunteers" was addressed in my > email. Lacking volunteers is not a reason to fail to provide access to new > joiners editing in good faith. > > > >> What isn’t feasible is automatically giving everyone IPBE, global or >> local, as it would make CU next to useless. Anyone intent on abuse could >> just flip a VPN on. This isn’t “the convenience of current checkusers”, >> this is an indisputable fact. People subject to bans often try to get IPBE >> so they can edit on a VPN without concern for that account being found in >> relation to previous ones. Any human review is better than mass-granting it >> to tens of thousands of accounts. We just need to speed up the time it >> takes to do that human review. >> >> > No, it would not "make CU next to useless". If people are contributing as > part of editathons or similar, and if 100% of all their contributions are > valuable good faith contributions, nothing else should matter. Literally > they are not using the account for anything wrong, so why would anyone > care? It is not the job of checkusers to be secret police and see all new > joiners in bad faith, that is neither useful, nor a good use of volunteer > time. > > >> Regards, >> Rae >> >> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 04:48 Lane Chance <zinkl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> "Granting IPBE by default to [...extendedconfirmed]/etc. users is not >>> feasible." >>> >>> Granting IPBE to large groups of good faith editors is feasible, such as >>> entire classes of people during editathons, all registered accounts joining >>> a virtual conference, or everyone with more than 1,000 edits on wikidata. >>> >>> "also make CU next to useless" is a unverifiable hypothesis which puts >>> the convenience of current checkusers and the existing practices against >>> the safety of new and regular users. >>> >>> Checkusers are not legally accountable for their use of privileges, and >>> in the past checkusers have been found to have kept their own private >>> records, despite the agreement not to do it and simply been allowed to >>> vanish without any serious consequences. >>> >>> Considering that the risks to some users is prosecution, imprisonment or >>> harassment by state actors which may be instigated by leaking this >>> information, simple precautions like GIPBE should be automatic and >>> preferably unquestioned for some regions or types of editathon or >>> competition, such as for good faith contributors to the articles about the >>> Ukraine war or human rights in China. If that's inconvenient for volunteer >>> checkusers, than it's pretty certain that the WMF can fund an support >>> service under meaningfully legally enforceable non-disclosure agreements, >>> even independent of the WMF itself if necessary, to run necessary >>> verification and ensure that the editors are not just vandals or state >>> lobbyists. >>> >>> Lane >>> >>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 at 20:49, Rae Adimer via Wikimedia-l < >>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: >>> >>>> It would result in every block effectively being anon-only, and it >>>> would also make CU next to useless. Granting IPBE by default to >>>> autoconfirmed/extendedconfirmed/etc. users is not feasible. >>>> >>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>> User:Vermont <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Vermont> on >>>> Wikimedia projects >>>> they/them/theirs (why pronouns matter >>>> <https://www.mypronouns.org/what-and-why>) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:00 PM Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> IPBE for autoconfirmed is a local matter, it would imply that any >>>>> block (TOR included) will, in practice, almost turn into anon-only. >>>>> >>>>> Expiration is an option, as for any global group. >>>>> >>>>> Vito >>>>> >>>>> Il giorno gio 21 apr 2022 alle ore 19:51 Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> >>>>> ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>>> How significant is the risk in just granting autoconfirmed (or >>>>>> similar) users IPBE by default? Why does IPBE expire anyway? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:50 AM DerHexer via Wikimedia-l < >>>>>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for raising the topic. Being a steward for 14+ years, I've >>>>>>> followed closely the evolution of that problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> “When I noticed that range blocks caused more harm than good >>>>>>> (countless mails to stewards), I started to reduce the length of any >>>>>>> such >>>>>>> block (if necessary at all; I check every single range intensively if a >>>>>>> block would case more harm than good). The situation with OPs is a bit >>>>>>> different because they obfuscate the original IP address which is pretty >>>>>>> often needed by checkusers and stewards to stop harm against the >>>>>>> projects. >>>>>>> For that reason, I agree that we cannot give up on OP blocking. The only >>>>>>> way to get out of these problems are (much!) easier reporting ways, more >>>>>>> people who can give out exceptions (locally and globally) and check >>>>>>> outdated OPs and IPBEs. Maybe it would also make sense to give long-term >>>>>>> users an option to self-assign an IPBE (e.g.) once per week for x hours >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> such cases like edit-a-thons. Most of their IP addresses used would >>>>>>> still >>>>>>> be reported (in order to prevent abuse) but most problems for that one >>>>>>> moment would be solved (and users could look for long-term solutions).” >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why the quotation marks? Because I've posted that very same message >>>>>>> to the metawiki page >>>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking#Comment_from_Vermont> >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> understand it as one step towards a solution. In my opinion, it makes >>>>>>> way >>>>>>> more sense to talk publicly about the issue and possible solutions than >>>>>>> losing good ideas (and there have been some already in this thread!) in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> wide world of this mailing list. Let's have that conversation >>>>>>> onwiki—and I >>>>>>> also encourage the WMF tech departments to join in that conversation. >>>>>>> Because we as stewards have reported our problems with the current >>>>>>> situation multiple times, sought for technical solutions (e.g., better >>>>>>> reporting tools), indeed did get a better rapport with the WMF teams but >>>>>>> still are not where we need to be in order to serve both interests >>>>>>> (openness and protection). Unsurprisingly, also stewards are individuals >>>>>>> with different opinions and (possible) solutions to that one problem. As >>>>>>> Vito said, we will once again discuss it and will share our thoughts and >>>>>>> solutions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> DerHexer (Martin) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 20. April 2022, 20:19:48 MESZ hat Florence Devouard < >>>>>>> fdevou...@gmail.com> Folgendes geschrieben: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello friends >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Short version : We need to find solutions to avoid so many africans >>>>>>> being globally IP blocked due to our No Open Proxies policy. >>>>>>> *https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking >>>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking>* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Long version : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to raise attention on an issue, which has been getting >>>>>>> worse in the past couple of weeks/months. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Increasing number of editors getting blocked due to the No Open >>>>>>> Proxies policy [1] >>>>>>> In particular africans. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In February 2004, the decision was made to block open proxies on >>>>>>> Meta and all other Wikimedia projects. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> According to the no open proxies policy : Publicly available >>>>>>> proxies (including paid proxies) may be blocked for any period at any >>>>>>> time. >>>>>>> While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended >>>>>>> targets >>>>>>> and may freely use proxies until those are blocked [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Non-static IP addresses or hosts that are otherwise not permanent >>>>>>> proxies should typically be blocked for a shorter period of time, as it >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> likely the IP address will eventually be transferred or dynamically >>>>>>> reassigned, or the open proxy closed. Once closed, the IP address >>>>>>> should be >>>>>>> unblocked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> According to the policy page, « the Editors can be permitted to edit >>>>>>> by way of an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag. This is granted >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> local projects by administrators and globally by stewards. » >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I repeat -----> ... legitimate users... may freely use proxies until >>>>>>> those are blocked. the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an >>>>>>> open >>>>>>> proxy with the IP block exempt flag <------ it is not illegal to edit >>>>>>> using >>>>>>> an open proxy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most editors though... have no idea whatsoever what an open proxy >>>>>>> is. They do not understand well what to do when they are blocked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the past few weeks, the number of African editors reporting being >>>>>>> blocked due to open proxy has been VERY significantly increasing. >>>>>>> New editors just as old timers. >>>>>>> Unexperienced editors but also staff members, president of >>>>>>> usergroups, organizers of edit-a-thons and various wikimedia >>>>>>> initiatives. >>>>>>> At home, but also during events organized with usergroup members or >>>>>>> trainees, during edit-a-thons, photo uploads sessions etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is NOT the occasional highly unlikely situation. This has become >>>>>>> a regular occurence. >>>>>>> There are cases and complains every week. Not one complaint per >>>>>>> week. Several complaints per week. >>>>>>> *This is irritating. This is offending. This is stressful. This is >>>>>>> disrupting activities organized in good faith by good people, activities >>>>>>> set-up with our donors funds. **And the disruption** is primarlly >>>>>>> taking place in a geographical region supposingly to be nurtured (per >>>>>>> our >>>>>>> strategy for diversity, equity, inclusion blahblahblah). * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The open proxy policy page suggests that, should a person be >>>>>>> unfairly blocked, it is recommended >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - * to privately email stewards[image: (_AT_)]wikimedia.org. >>>>>>> - * or alternatively, to post a request (if able to edit, if the >>>>>>> editor doesn't mind sharing their IP for global blocks or their >>>>>>> reasons to >>>>>>> desire privacy (for Tor usage)). >>>>>>> - * the current message displayed to the blocked editor also >>>>>>> suggest contacting User:Tks4Fish. This editor is involved in >>>>>>> vandalism >>>>>>> fighting and is probably the user blocking open proxies IPs the >>>>>>> most. See >>>>>>> log >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So... >>>>>>> Option 1: contacting stewards : it seems that they are not >>>>>>> answering. Or not quickly. Or requesting lengthy justifications before >>>>>>> adding people to IP block exemption list. >>>>>>> Option 2: posting a request for unblock on meta. For those who want >>>>>>> to look at the process, I suggest looking at it [3] and think hard about >>>>>>> how a new editor would feel. This is simply incredibly complicated >>>>>>> Option 3 : user:TksFish answers... sometimes... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a consequence, most editors concerned with those global blocks... >>>>>>> stay blocked several days. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We do not know know why the situation has rapidly got worse >>>>>>> recently. But it got worse. And the reports are spilling all over. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We started collecting negative experiences on this page [4]. >>>>>>> Please note that people who added their names here are not random >>>>>>> newbies. They are known and respected members of our community, often >>>>>>> leaders of activities and/or representant of their usergroups, who are >>>>>>> confronted to this situation on a REGULAR basis. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I do not know how this can be fixed. Should we slow down open proxy >>>>>>> blocking ? Should we add a mecanism and process for an easier and >>>>>>> quicker >>>>>>> IP block exemption process post-blocking ? Should we improve a process >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> our editors to pre-emptively be added to this IP block exemption list ? >>>>>>> Or >>>>>>> what ? I do not know what's the strategy to fix that. But there is a >>>>>>> problem. Who should that problem be addressed to ? Who has solutions ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Flo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Tks4Fish >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global_permissions#Requests_for_global_IP_block_exemption >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking >>>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking>* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, >>>>>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >>>>>>> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>>>>>> Public archives at >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/UU76SJ5LZI5MA5F3WC3NSY4UMGDQTGXR/ >>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to >>>>>>> wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, >>>>>>> guidelines at: >>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>>>>>> Public archives at >>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/Y5UMK72JMT2FZY5V455QHEWHZ3W2QGXQ/ >>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to >>>>>>> wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, >>>>>> guidelines at: >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>>>>> Public archives at >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/5TMQ4I27YE6F4FIMFLGBVWJ34YLEFXHE/ >>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, >>>>> guidelines at: >>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>>>> Public archives at >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KZ2A3TFAQXKKCLHUQXEXHMXF6PNAGD5N/ >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, >>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >>>> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>>> >>> Public archives at >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QUSR3JGDUKF7E6I63II3CNOGIKKQF6DE/ >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines >>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >>> Public archives at >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/FRJAYBQCD4YYE3H2MQ4UIXLWONTLOHRN/ >>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> -- >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> User:Vermont <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Vermont> on Wikimedia >> projects >> they/them/theirs (why pronouns matter >> <https://www.mypronouns.org/what-and-why>) >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RXJ2MVTDNWYGGTTW6K3ZS4CIMX7M4DG2/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VEAJVQ6H5CQSVWP7MGIMER25YV6H3SES/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZT6VGP47MGYAWY64E2Q34CP5CDCV5O6U/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
