I'm not sure I agree that they cannot work. What they cannot do is be supported between versions, and it will be hard to prove robustness. If you patch one version completely, a new one with new holes will soon appear - special pages etc.
http://conseil-recherche-innovation.net/index.php/1974/04/11/41-restrict-pag... So I second the call for more hooks - at least enough so that the chaps doing the view restrict patch don't have to fight every release of MW. I also fully accept its not in the direct path of MediaWiki at the moment - but then the wikipedia used to be completely open and editable by anyone ;).
As the author of the patch, I agree this point of view! I do not do lobbying for the same reason (its not in the direct path of MediaWiki at the moment). But as the time pasts, we see the need to control some actions (eg. creation of new pages for unregistred users). So IMO, the ACL model should be generalised in the core of MW.
It wouldn't help, though, because MediaWiki is built around being able to access the content via hundreds of different methods...hence the reason all these hacks don't work 100%. Rob Church
I think the patch works at 100% concerning page content accesses (except in case of MW security hole of course). For titles, as you say there are many ways to retrieve them. But the patch seems quite secure concerning titles retrieving as well. The problem is more that it's not a beautiful way to build a proved security model...
Jej