"Chris Grant" wrote in message
news:CAF_zKbp-aBGzGcy4LQQvbTXUr-2tjO8OpmbwxtROsfvihuc_fg@mail.gmail.com...
On 11 Feb 2015 17:57, "Petr Bena"
<benapetr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As I said, I belive that any registered user should be able to use,
with no need for permissions as I see no way to abuse it.
If anyone can use it, wouldn't the smarter vandals just use it to avoid the
RC patrollers?
How does a user prove that they're using a particular tool a way that can't be
faked? Something like OAuth comes to mind. All edits made via an OAuth consumer
are already tagged with a unique tag, and I would assume that it is not possible
to falsely represent an OAuth consumer.
I'm not sure whether this could work for common tools like AWB or Twinkle,
though:
* I don't know whether OAuth works for client-side downloadable programs like
AWB.
* JavaScript tools edit as the user from the user's browser, and as such, OAuth
is not relevant to them. In any case, anything they do (like adding a specific
string to edit summaries, adding a tag to their edits, or the like) can be
easily spoofed or faked by a tech-savvy user.
Before change tagging could be used as a way to *filter out* particular tool
edits (as opposed to being simply a way of identifying revisions that satisfy
some criterion) the RC tag filter would need to be improved.
(I'm not pretending that change tagging is the only solution for Petr's "tool
edits" idea: I just think it is the most likely candidate for implementing
something like this.)
TTO