On Sep 18, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
Stirling Newberry wrote:
You didn't check carefully - the edit history shows that the image was last updated in March, when, in fact, the pornographic image has only been in place for a few hours. Or do you think that it would have been left on my user page for months with no one commenting on it?
No, the image description page was last updated in March, the image itself has been changed three times in the last day. Uploading a new version of an old image does not cause an entry to be placed in the history of the image description page. And as Stephen Forrest pointed out, the upload was performed by an imposter with a homographic name. No secret sysadmin powers required.
-- Tim Starling
Then that is a huge user interface and security hole - because someone looking at the history of the image would think that the original uploader uploaded the image. In an organization that relies on users being able to track and document problems this is gap in that ability.