Message: 3 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:06:36 +1000 From: "Craig Franklin" craig@halo-17.net Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] exicornt switch To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Message-ID: 001501c64c16$bff788e0$015a5a0a@equinox Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Scr?obh Mark Williamson :
The current situation seems to be that all AOL users are blocked pending cooperation from AOL in trying to stop vandalism. This seems like a good approach to me.
Frankly, I have to agree. I can't see any problem with this.
Is the user violating any AOL AUP term? I highly doubt it so I wouldn't expect AOL to stop this. Maybe the user just needs to be left alone and ignored and a campaign initiated to educate the public on what the real term of the railroad switch is. :)
.s
The problem is not what the users do from AOL IPs, it is the way AOL *assigns* IPs. Right now, if you are an AOL dial-up user, you will be assigned a new IP every 15 minutes, or every page load, whichever comes first. Literally *every time you load a page, you will have a new IP*. That makes blocking problematic AOL users *impossible*. By the time a sysop can discover and block a given address, the vandal has jumpted IPs at least once, potentially a dozen times. Additionally, no sooner than the block button is clicked, a legitimate AOL user with an account will be assigned that IP, and will be blocked. This is not as much of a problem on smaller projects, with fewer editors, fewer vandals, (and fewer AOL users as a result), but it is a serious problem on large projects like en.wikipedia, where there are thousands of AOL users.
I can think of two users off the top of my head (two of a thousand, maybe ten thousand similarly affected that I don't happen to know personally) who are blocked as a result of an AOL IP block nearly *every time they try to make an edit*. EVERY TIME. The only advice to them is to suck it up, or get a new ISP. (There is a little known trick that has come to light recently, but I'm not willing to state it publicly, lest vandals begin abusing it). These are good users, valuable contributors, who are being prevented from editing with no recourse.
What we need is not for AOL to take action against vandals; we don't go to the ISPs of other vandals (routinely) and shouldn't for these. What we *do need* is for AOL to stop running what amounts to a massive anonymous proxy service. If AOL would just assign a single IP when a user connects, and leave them on that IP until they disconnect (which is what most ISPs do, as I understand it) it would solve a lot of our problems. Not all of them; there would still be collateral damage autoblocks, because AOL is huge and a lot of people use it, but at least we could begin to block *the people responsible for vandalism* instead of carpetbombing AOL users, which is basically what we do now.
Essjay
On 3/20/06, Stacey Doljack Borsody hjernespiser@yahoo.com wrote:
Message: 3 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:06:36 +1000 From: "Craig Franklin" craig@halo-17.net Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] exicornt switch To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Message-ID: 001501c64c16$bff788e0$015a5a0a@equinox Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Scr?obh Mark Williamson :
The current situation seems to be that all AOL users are blocked pending cooperation from AOL in trying to stop vandalism. This seems like a good approach to me.
Frankly, I have to agree. I can't see any problem with this.
Is the user violating any AOL AUP term? I highly doubt it so I wouldn't expect AOL to stop this. Maybe the user just needs to be left alone and ignored and a campaign initiated to educate the public on what the real term of the railroad switch is. :)
.s _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Essjay ----- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Essjay Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia http://www.wikipedia.org/
- Essjay - wrote:
The problem is not what the users do from AOL IPs, it is the way AOL *assigns* IPs. Right now, if you are an AOL dial-up user, you will be assigned a new IP every 15 minutes, or every page load, whichever comes first. Literally *every time you load a page, you will have a new IP*. That makes blocking problematic AOL users *impossible*. By the time a sysop can discover and block a given address, the vandal has jumpted IPs at least once, potentially a dozen times. Additionally, no sooner than the block button is clicked, a legitimate AOL user with an account will be assigned that IP, and will be blocked. This is not as much of a problem on smaller projects, with fewer editors, fewer vandals, (and fewer AOL users as a result), but it is a serious problem on large projects like en.wikipedia, where there are thousands of AOL users.
That's certainly not the impression we gained when we researched this a couple of years ago. Has something changed recently? AOL's information on this subject certainly hasn't changed:
http://webmaster.info.aol.com/proxyinfo.html
My understanding on this subject is that in the US, AOL uses a proxy cluster with load balancing by a hash of the destination URL. Thus if you block an AOL IP which edited a particular article, you block all AOL edits to that particular article.
-- Tim Starling
This has been my experience on en.wikipedia, as well as what we (the users) are told when we complain about AOL. It is certainly the case that within seconds of blocking an IP, a legit user is affected, while the exact same vandal is mysteriously on a new IP continuing his vandal spree. It seems awfully coincidental to me that the vandal would be able to get onto a new IP within seconds of the old one being blocked (I've had dialup, and I was never able to disconnect and reconnect in a matter of seconds) while at the exact same time a Wikipeida contributor dials in and is assigned the IP the vandal was using, as opposed to some non-Wikipedian being assigned it.
Perhaps I'm completely wrong; I only know what a lot of vandalfighting has taught me, along with what I've been told by people who are supposed to know what they are talking about.
Essjay
On 3/20/06, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
- Essjay - wrote:
The problem is not what the users do from AOL IPs, it is the way AOL *assigns* IPs. Right now, if you are an AOL dial-up user, you will be assigned a new IP every 15 minutes, or every page load, whichever comes first. Literally *every time you load a page, you will have a new IP*.
That
makes blocking problematic AOL users *impossible*. By the time a sysop
can
discover and block a given address, the vandal has jumpted IPs at least once, potentially a dozen times. Additionally, no sooner than the block button is clicked, a legitimate AOL user with an account will be
assigned
that IP, and will be blocked. This is not as much of a problem on
smaller
projects, with fewer editors, fewer vandals, (and fewer AOL users as a result), but it is a serious problem on large projects like en.wikipedia
,
where there are thousands of AOL users.
That's certainly not the impression we gained when we researched this a couple of years ago. Has something changed recently? AOL's information on this subject certainly hasn't changed:
http://webmaster.info.aol.com/proxyinfo.html
My understanding on this subject is that in the US, AOL uses a proxy cluster with load balancing by a hash of the destination URL. Thus if you block an AOL IP which edited a particular article, you block all AOL edits to that particular article.
-- Tim Starling
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- Essjay ----- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Essjay Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia http://www.wikipedia.org/
- Essjay - wrote:
This has been my experience on en.wikipedia, as well as what we (the users) are told when we complain about AOL. It is certainly the case that within seconds of blocking an IP, a legit user is affected, while the exact same vandal is mysteriously on a new IP continuing his vandal spree. It seems awfully coincidental to me that the vandal would be able to get onto a new IP within seconds of the old one being blocked (I've had dialup, and I was never able to disconnect and reconnect in a matter of seconds) while at the exact same time a Wikipeida contributor dials in and is assigned the IP the vandal was using, as opposed to some non-Wikipedian being assigned it.
Perhaps I'm completely wrong; I only know what a lot of vandalfighting has taught me, along with what I've been told by people who are supposed to know what they are talking about.
The proxy IP changes on every request, not the client IP. The client IP is stable throughout the PPP session. The site I linked to in my previous post contains a discussion of the difference between the two.
We can in fact determine the AOL client IP using a Java applet or ActiveX control. I once floated the idea of serving Java applets to AOL users, but it met with a cold reception, for usability reasons. And of course the results returned by an applet running on the client could be spoofed.
Maybe we could use an SSL web bug or redirect script. I imagine SSL requests wouldn't be proxied.
-- Tim Starling
On 3/20/06, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
We can in fact determine the AOL client IP using a Java applet or ActiveX control. I once floated the idea of serving Java applets to AOL users, but it met with a cold reception, for usability reasons. And of course the results returned by an applet running on the client could be spoofed.
Maybe we could use an SSL web bug or redirect script. I imagine SSL requests wouldn't be proxied.
cookie based blocks cookie based blocks cookie based blocks
Come on.. fairly straight forward to impliment. Catch at least *some* of the twits!
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org