Thanks, Dan... I was going to ask about that, too.  I don't understand well
enough what is and isn't visible in the API, but I will say that if the API
is linking an action (i.e., suppression) to a user (i.e. the specific
oversighter) I *do* have a problem with it; we've had experience in the
past with people actively harassing oversighters because of legitimate
suppressions they've carried out, and perhaps this is exactly how they've
found out it was Oversighter A who did that particular suppression.

Risker/Anne

On 9 December 2014 at 14:01, Dan Garry <[email protected]> wrote:

> Speaking from my experience as an oversighter, I find it a bit strange that
> when you oversight something, information that is hidden in the UI is not
> hidden in the API. That notwithstanding, there is nothing particularly
> private about the information that is shown in the API only (i.e. the type
> of the action), but I found it strange.
>
> I also find it strange that the fact that this information is still
> available via the API is not mentioned in the interface. I've been an
> oversighter for many, many years, and I never knew that this information
> could be retrieved via the API.
>
> Personally, I prefer the way things are after Chris's change. It makes the
> UI and API more consistent with each other.
>
> That said, given that there is no particularly private information given
> out in the API response, I don't think it's worth complaining about Brad's
> patch. It's not the way I'd prefer it to be, but it doesn't personally
> strike me as overtly incorrect or as causing any real problems.
>
> Dan
>
> On 1 December 2014 at 17:30, Chris Steipp <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I wanted to get some feedback about
> > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T74222.
> > In the last security release, I changed the return of the api to remove
> the
> > "action" for log entries that had been revdeleted with "Hide action and
> > target". However, ever since 2009 / r46917, we've assumed that "Hide
> action
> > and target" didn't mean the actual action field in the db, but rather the
> > target and the text of the message about the action, which might include
> > other parameters. So the message about what's being hidden and the
> intended
> > protection of that option could have slightly different interpretations.
> >
> > I'd like to hear if anyone has intended for the actual log action to be
> > deleted / suppressed. If not, I'm happy to revert the recent patch, and
> > we'll just update the wording in the deletion UI to be more clear about
> > what is being removed.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dan Garry
> Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps
> Wikimedia Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to