bugs wrote:

(In reply to comment #0)

The ipblock-exempt user group can be set on any wiki by stewards, which should
not be the case. It should exist only on:
*enwiki (bug 9862)

There is no problem with this wiki.

*commons (bug 14507)

Of course this wouldn't be listed there, because it was not yet enabled for Commons.

*meta (bug 14876)

This isn't a problem. It's probably not listed on the page because stewards have "userrights" which allows them to set *any* local right (that would incldue "ipblock-exempt").

On those wikis, it should be listed as a local group; elsewhere it should not
be listed, as the user group doesn't exist. On wikis where there is no
ipblock-exempt group, it should not be settable by stewards.
So there are two problems: it is settable where it shouldn't be and it isn't
listed where it should be (until it becomes unsettable there by fixing the
first thing).

It's also available on Russian Wikipedia because they requested it, see bug 14876.

So, I don't see there being any problems. => INVALID

bugs wrote:

I see the existing problem with the "existing where it shouldn't be":

• (User rights log); 01:00 . . Dungodung (Talk | contribs) changed group membership for User:Mike.lifeguard@enwikibooks from Bureaucrats, CheckUsers, IP block exemptions and Sysops to Bureaucrats, CheckUsers and Sysops (this inconsistency is bad :\ and I complained on #wikimedia-tech but no one heard me :()
• (User rights log); 01:00 . . Dungodung (Talk | contribs) changed group membership for User:Mike.lifeguard@enwikibooks from Bureaucrats, CheckUsers and Sysops to Bureaucrats, CheckUsers, Sysops and IP block exemptions (ya see)

but the other half of your bug doesn't seem to be a problem, so I've removed that aspect of it.

Though, as long as local users shouldn't be able to set this, it shouldn't be a problem... because stewards aren't allowed to set it without a policy on the local wiki.

mike.lifeguard+bugs wrote:

(In reply to comment #2)

I see the existing problem with the "existing where it shouldn't be":

• (User rights log); 01:00 . . Dungodung (Talk | contribs) changed group

membership for User:Mike.lifeguard@enwikibooks from Bureaucrats, CheckUsers, IP
block exemptions and Sysops to Bureaucrats, CheckUsers and Sysops (this
inconsistency is bad :\ and I complained on #wikimedia-tech but no one heard me
:()

• (User rights log); 01:00 . . Dungodung (Talk | contribs) changed group

membership for User:Mike.lifeguard@enwikibooks from Bureaucrats, CheckUsers and
Sysops to Bureaucrats, CheckUsers, Sysops and IP block exemptions (ya see)

but the other half of your bug doesn't seem to be a problem, so I've removed
that aspect of it.

Though, as long as local users shouldn't be able to set this, it shouldn't be a
problem... because stewards aren't allowed to set it without a policy on the
local wiki.

The fact that stewards have full access to Special:UserRights is irrelevant to whether the right is listed on Special:ListGroupRights on meta.

Take the enwikibooks example: The right should not exist there at all. However, if it exists (as clearly it does, though erroneously), it should be listed on Special:ListGroupRights, which is is not. Both parts of the problem exist here, though my list of where it should and shouldn't exist may be incorrect.

Users can be added to the 'ipblock-exempt' group on any wiki. However, membership of that group does not confer any additional permissions on users in it, unless that wiki has the group set up properly.

This is because the available groups listed on Special:Userrights come from meta, not from the target wiki (bug 12518).

• This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 12518 ***