As extension creators.

(Onlookers' comment) That function allows one (through a checkbox) to submit some private data (IP addresses and email, for example) of an account to stopforumspam.com. Seems like this one would be the biggest privacy concern with using this extension on Wikimedia, when users with the permission to submit may use it (if at all) - and who receives that permission. Can't speak of the blocking function itself.

In T125338#1984953, @JEumerus wrote:

(Onlookers' comment) That function allows one (through a checkbox) to submit some private data (IP addresses and email, for example) of an account to stopforumspam.com. Seems like this one would be the biggest privacy concern with using this extension on Wikimedia, when users with the permission to submit may use it (if at all) - and who receives that permission. Can't speak of the blocking function itself.

Yes, data submission is my main concern as well hence this bug. I don't think we want to enable that. As for IP blocking, if what the extension does is to regularly download a list of IPs or ranges flagged as toxic, and such list is stored on our sites; I'd say there's no problem with that. I think that's the expected behaviour by reading the extension description.

getConfidenceInternal also seems problematic from a privacy prespective (If I read it right. I only skimmed)

I suspect the feature that we want to use at Wikimedia would be the IP blacklist. Technically the featureset is similar to TorBlock (that's where I got the idea and modeled some of it after).

There should be no privacy issues since we're just downloading a list and applying it I think.

I can help with the technical side of deployment if it gets that far, but have no time to do the social stuff.

In T125338#1984960, @Bawolff wrote:

getConfidenceInternal also seems problematic from a privacy prespective (If I read it right. I only skimmed)

Agreed, and it's probably too slow to use anyways.

Using $wgSFSEnableConfidenceVariable to rate the user/ip in abuse filter would definitely be a violation of our privacy policy. Just using the (ipv4) blacklist would be fine by the privacy policy, although the implementation would probably need a little work.

I would be a little uncomfortable with the whole extension being deployed when half of it is a violation of our privacy policy, but might be ok in the short-term.

I think that regularly downloading the IPv4/IPv6 blacklists from SFS to restrict so called 'toxic' IPs and ranges without sending any user data to SFS is what might help us better. If it's not the whole extension, at least the blacklists could be implemented. Doesn't MediaWiki-extensions-TorBlock work that way?

Yes, that's basically how torblock works too.

@Legoktm, it looks like Ex:SFS expects the format of the "listed.." csv files, not the toxic list [https://www.stopforumspam.com/downloads/toxic_ip_cidr.txt]. Would you propose we use the lists that are constantly updated (I'm guessing use either the 7-days or 24-hour list)? Or would we update the way these are stored to include blocking the toxic ip ranges too?

@Legoktm ping :)

Hello. Any progress on this one? Thanks.

Hi @Legoktm. Yes, I think it'd be positive to have SFS on Wikimedia wikis for toxic IP/IP addresses restrictions. SFS is a regular source for our spambot checks. If you think it'll help as well, I'd like to see this code and security reviewed. Thanks in advance. Regards.

Just adding this e-mail snippet from @Legoktm from Dec. 14th as a reminder to myself (or whomever) that this still needs to go through formal review:

It'll still need to go through a formal security review, that was just an informal investigation task.

In T125338#2891857, @dpatrick wrote:

Just adding this e-mail snippet from @Legoktm from Dec. 14th as a reminder to myself (or whomever) that this still needs to go through formal review:

It'll still need to go through a formal security review, that was just an informal investigation task.

I'll create a task for that if that's what's needed. But I don't know what to ask the devs to look at specifically.

@dpatrick I've filled T155725: Security review for StopForumSpam - hope that's right. Regards.