Page MenuHomePhabricator

allow users without a wiki cloak trigger the ops stalkword
Closed, DeclinedPublic

Description

There are users in Wikimedia channels that are trusted contributors that do not have a wiki cloak therefore unable to trigger the !ops stalkword, there should be either more cloaks added, or some sort of whitelist feature

Event Timeline

Zppix created this task.Mar 17 2020, 7:54 PM
Restricted Application added a project: User-Zppix. · View Herald TranscriptMar 17 2020, 7:54 PM
Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald Transcript

For the record, I'm against this change. If there's truly an issue, a trusted contributor with a WMF cloak can bangops just as easily. But by whitelisting other networks, it becomes trivial to social engineer enough to begin creating spam. And I know a couple of our bad actors would love that.

Zppix renamed this task from allow users without a wiki cloak trigger the !ops stalkword to allow users without a wiki cloak trigger the ops stalkword.Mar 17 2020, 8:19 PM
Zppix added a comment.Mar 17 2020, 8:22 PM

For the record, I'm against this change. If there's truly an issue, a trusted contributor with a WMF cloak can bangops just as easily. But by whitelisting other networks, it becomes trivial to social engineer enough to begin creating spam. And I know a couple of our bad actors would love that.

Why can't a trusted contributor without a wiki cloak be given the same rights as one with one?

Are you proposing a username based whitelist, or additional group cloaks to be whitelisted?

Zppix added a comment.Mar 17 2020, 8:28 PM

Are you proposing a username based whitelist, or additional group cloaks to be whitelisted?

I would propose at least additional cloaks

Please list what you are proposing, instead of people randomly guessing your intentions.

Zppix added a comment.Mar 17 2020, 8:30 PM

Please list what you are proposing, instead of people randomly guessing your intentions.

there should be either more cloaks added, or some sort of whitelist feature

For the record, I'm against this change. If there's truly an issue, a trusted contributor with a WMF cloak can bangops just as easily. But by whitelisting other networks, it becomes trivial to social engineer enough to begin creating spam. And I know a couple of our bad actors would love that.

Why can't a trusted contributor without a wiki cloak be given the same rights as one with one?

Wiki contributors are vetted using OAth, requiring 250 edits, three months service, and no active blocks. I consider that pretty low bar, certainly not something would preclude someone who is hanging in our channels actively to achieve.

And if not, someone with a cloak can bangops. Or go to #wikimedia-ops and ask for help.

Zppix added a comment.Mar 17 2020, 8:33 PM

For the record, I'm against this change. If there's truly an issue, a trusted contributor with a WMF cloak can bangops just as easily. But by whitelisting other networks, it becomes trivial to social engineer enough to begin creating spam. And I know a couple of our bad actors would love that.

Why can't a trusted contributor without a wiki cloak be given the same rights as one with one?

Wiki contributors are vetted using OAth, requiring 250 edits, three months service, and no active blocks. I consider that pretty low bar, certainly not something would preclude someone who is hanging in our channels actively to achieve.

And if not, someone with a cloak can bangops. Or go to #wikimedia-ops and ask for help.

What about for example for users like myself, who meet those criteria for a cloak, but have a cloak with a different project?

For the record, I'm against this change. If there's truly an issue, a trusted contributor with a WMF cloak can bangops just as easily. But by whitelisting other networks, it becomes trivial to social engineer enough to begin creating spam. And I know a couple of our bad actors would love that.

Why can't a trusted contributor without a wiki cloak be given the same rights as one with one?

Wiki contributors are vetted using OAth, requiring 250 edits, three months service, and no active blocks. I consider that pretty low bar, certainly not something would preclude someone who is hanging in our channels actively to achieve.

And if not, someone with a cloak can bangops. Or go to #wikimedia-ops and ask for help.

What about for example for users like myself, who meet those criteria for a cloak, but have a cloak with a different project?

That is your choice. But I don't think your choice should have the chanops spend time maintaining a special whitelist of usernames (that's lots of time!) or projects (open to abuse, see above).

jrbs added a subscriber: jrbs.Mar 17 2020, 8:46 PM

Volunteer GC comment: Don't most ops just stalk the phrase "!ops" anyway? Maybe I'm just old skool. :)

Apparently many do, or so we found out when wikibugs copied your comment into the channel, !_ops included :)

Aklapper closed this task as Declined.May 17 2020, 10:10 PM

That is your choice. But I don't think your choice should have the chanops spend time maintaining a special whitelist of usernames (that's lots of time!) or projects (open to abuse, see above).

Boldly declining.

Restricted Application added a subscriber: RhinosF1. · View Herald TranscriptMay 17 2020, 10:10 PM