Mailing List Archive: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed

erik_moeller at gmx

Nov 4, 2002, 3:47 AM

Post #1 of 7 (881 views)

Hi,

I'd like to suggest two solutions to the blocking of dynamic IP addresses or
proxies that may affect innocent users.

Solution #1: IP address blocks should expire after n days unless renewed by
someone. That way, instead of forgetting to unblock people, at worst we
forget to re-block them. In my opinion, it's better to fail to punish somone
effectively than to punish someone who's innocent.

Solution #2: We should give blocked users a way to re-gain access to the
site, namely by creating an account. I don't know if this is currently possible,
but it should be. We can block accounts a lot easier than IP addresses. So
we could basically say on the block page: "Because IP addresses cannot be
reliably linked to individuals, it may be that you receive this message in error.
In that case, or if you want to change your behavior, please create an
account and sign in, and you can continue to use Wikipedia."

We might still reserve complete IP&account bans for those who abuse the
account "backdoor", but this should be the exception, not the rule.

This would make our security softer, and hopefully more effective.

Regards,

Erik

--
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen!

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

toby+wikipedia at math

Nov 4, 2002, 12:06 PM

Post #2 of 7 (865 views)

Erik Moeller wrote in first part:

>I'd like to suggest two solutions to the blocking of dynamic IP addresses or
>proxies that may affect innocent users.

I like both of these ideas.

-- Toby

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

Nov 4, 2002, 12:36 PM

Post #3 of 7 (867 views)

>
>Solution #2: We should give blocked users a way to re-gain access to the
>site, namely by creating an account. I don't know if this is currently
>possible,
>but it should be. We can block accounts a lot easier than IP addresses. So
>we could basically say on the block page: "Because IP addresses cannot be
>reliably linked to individuals, it may be that you receive this message in
>error.
>In that case, or if you want to change your behavior, please create an
>account and sign in, and you can continue to use Wikipedia."

I definitely agree with this. I was quite surprised to find that when my
(proxy server) IP was banned, I was banned too - even though I was logged
in.

Incidentally, my (default) proxy (194.117.133.196 cache-haw.cableinet.co.uk)
is banned again - my ISP also caters to the recent goatse.cx vandal. I know
how to manually change my proxy, but other valid users on Blueyonder in south
west England ([[user: Nosrail]] for example) may not.

Rob
user:rbrwr

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

mattheww+wikipedia at chiark

Nov 4, 2002, 2:31 PM

Post #4 of 7 (867 views)

On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 07:36:48PM +0000, Rob Brewer wrote:
> Incidentally, my (default) proxy (194.117.133.196 cache-haw.cableinet.co.uk)
> is banned again - my ISP also caters to the recent goatse.cx vandal. I know
> how to manually change my proxy, but other valid users on Blueyonder in south
> west England ([[user: Nosrail]] for example) may not.

Perhaps there's a way we can make use of the 'Client-ip' and
'X-forwarded-for' headers which are added by many ISPs' proxies.

I think it would be necessary to decide whether the actual IP address
seemed to be a shared proxy or not when imposing the ban -- simply
matching against these headers whenever they were persent would just
make it easier for people with fixed IP addresses to avoid the ban.

It wouldn't help people with short-term IP address leases at all, of
course.

-M-

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

phma at webjockey

Nov 4, 2002, 4:08 PM

Post #5 of 7 (871 views)

On Monday 04 November 2002 16:31, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
> Perhaps there's a way we can make use of the 'Client-ip' and
> 'X-forwarded-for' headers which are added by many ISPs' proxies.

If you do that, you'll run afoul of me - I'm running Squid on the laptop, so
the client ip is 127.0.0.1.

> I think it would be necessary to decide whether the actual IP address
> seemed to be a shared proxy or not when imposing the ban -- simply
> matching against these headers whenever they were persent would just
> make it easier for people with fixed IP addresses to avoid the ban.

My criterion for banning is, if there are 3 vandalisms from an IP address, I
check a sample of the IP's contributions. If there are no good-looking edits,
I ban.

I suggest that IPs that have been unbanned because they're proxies be put on
a list, and if someone tries to ban that IP, he be warned that he's banning a
proxy.

phma

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

Nov 5, 2002, 2:13 AM

Post #6 of 7 (870 views)

At 18:08 04/11/02 -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:

>My criterion for banning is, if there are 3 vandalisms from an IP address, I
>check a sample of the IP's contributions. If there are no good-looking edits,
>I ban.

This is a good policy, except that (as far as I can tell) when you check
contribs for an IP address you only see edits made anonymously from that IP,
but when you ban an IP you ban both anonymous and signed-in users at that IP.
If a proxy or a shared computer has been used by an anonymous vandal and a
useful signed-in user, the signed-in user will be blocked, and Wikipedia
will lose the benefit of his edits.

Rob (rbrwr)

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Blocked, insulted, and pissed [ In reply to ]

phma at webjockey

Nov 5, 2002, 4:48 AM

Post #7 of 7 (869 views)

On Tuesday 05 November 2002 04:13, Rob Brewer wrote:
> This is a good policy, except that (as far as I can tell) when you check
> contribs for an IP address you only see edits made anonymously from that
> IP, but when you ban an IP you ban both anonymous and signed-in users at
> that IP. If a proxy or a shared computer has been used by an anonymous
> vandal and a useful signed-in user, the signed-in user will be blocked, and
> Wikipedia will lose the benefit of his edits.

This needs to be changed, then. Either we have to see the signed-in
contributions from an IP address, or blocking an IP address needs to not
block signed-in users and we need a way of blocking signed-in users.

phma