Are there AbuseFilter trips whose very existence is nonpublic? I thought it was only that with some the filter information (other than its name) is nonpublic. If so, I would think it's fine to show the disallow tally to anyone.

In T409396#11348665, @Tamzin wrote:

Are there AbuseFilter trips whose very existence is nonpublic? I thought it was only that with some the filter information (other than its name) is nonpublic. If so, I would think it's fine to show the disallow tally to anyone.

The number of AF hits is indeed public information. But I still believe it's better to limit this feature to admins. Similar to to the number of blocks users might feel stigmatized if their UserInfoCard publicly shows x disallowed edits (those might be false positives or there were other legitimate reasons for hitting the filter).

If number of AF trips is public information then I believe it is okay to show the information to everyone but limit showing this information only for temporary accounts and non-confirmed accounts. For auto confirmed accounts this will probably not be as useful a signal.

I think visible to everyone, but only for TAs & non-confirmed accounts, makes sense. Showing other accounts' disallow tallies specifically to admins wouldn't be much of a stigma problem, but I agree with Niharika that it's just not very useful, especially because at least on enwiki, most of our disallow filters affecting (auto)confirmed users are actually for very boring things like using an institutional-only URL.

If the IP has been revealed, then should the count be of AbuseFilter trips associated with the IP / IPv6 /64 range?

The link could go to Special:AbuseLog filtered to either the username or the IP

In T409396#11365281, @kostajh wrote:

If the IP has been revealed, then should the count be of AbuseFilter trips associated with the IP / IPv6 /64 range?

Why not, certainly a nice service saving patrollers / admins with TAIV enabled some clicks.

The link could go to Special:AbuseLog filtered to either the username or the IP

If the number of disallowed edits is given per IP or /64 range, the abuse log link should point to the IP or /64 range.

But it might also be confusing to users: I'm clicking on the user info card -> spotting something suspicious -> clicking "IP reveal" (which hides the info card at the same time) -> if I open the info card again the number of disallowed edits has changed (and the abuse log link as well)

In T409396#11348758, @Johannnes89 wrote:

In T409396#11348665, @Tamzin wrote:

Are there AbuseFilter trips whose very existence is nonpublic? I thought it was only that with some the filter information (other than its name) is nonpublic. If so, I would think it's fine to show the disallow tally to anyone.

The number of AF hits is indeed public information. But I still believe it's better to limit this feature to admins. Similar to to the number of blocks users might feel stigmatized if their UserInfoCard publicly shows x disallowed edits (those might be false positives or there were other legitimate reasons for hitting the filter).

I think it might be useful to note that on some wikis (not necessarily just enwiki) there are other groups that regularly interact with AbuseFilter to which visibility might be helpful. Certainly not necessary for every TAIV-enabled account, but not necessarily just admins, either.

In T409396#11416941, @EggRoll97 wrote:

In T409396#11348758, @Johannnes89 wrote:

In T409396#11348665, @Tamzin wrote:

Are there AbuseFilter trips whose very existence is nonpublic? I thought it was only that with some the filter information (other than its name) is nonpublic. If so, I would think it's fine to show the disallow tally to anyone.

The number of AF hits is indeed public information. But I still believe it's better to limit this feature to admins. Similar to to the number of blocks users might feel stigmatized if their UserInfoCard publicly shows x disallowed edits (those might be false positives or there were other legitimate reasons for hitting the filter).

I think it might be useful to note that on some wikis (not necessarily just enwiki) there are other groups that regularly interact with AbuseFilter to which visibility might be helpful. Certainly not necessary for every TAIV-enabled account, but not necessarily just admins, either.

I believe the solution proposed by Niharika in T409396#11352749 makes sense: Show the information to everyone but only show it for temporary and non-confirmed accounts -> avoids any issues with regular editors.