Editing Talk:Meta:Anonymous editing

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Learn more about Contributing to the wiki.

== CAPTCHA ==

lcuk on #maemo had an interesting idea, NIT-based CAPTCHA questions (i.e. What is the codename for Maemo 4.0? Chinook). Of course a regular CAPTCHA system should work fine, but this'd be a nice touch. The CAPTCHA has the nice effect of both not entirely preventing anonymous edits, while hopefully stopping the bots. This should probably come with a strong suggestion for the user to register. —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] 15:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

== Just Say No ==
I vote no for anonymous edits.<br>
I freely admit that I want to raise the bar for editing information on a source I would like to consider 'reference'.<br>
[[User:lbt|lbt]] 16:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
:+1 from me. No anonymous edits seems like a fair balance between protecting the wiki and protecting spammer's rights to mess it up. --[[User:dneary|dneary]] 07:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
:<del>+1. Spam is a serious problem. Registering or logging in is not.</del> (just saw [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Captcha MediaWiki's Manual:Combating spam] and was convinced by the discussion in maemo-developers)  --[[User:qgil|qgil]] 11:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
:+1. If you want to say something, say who you are first.--[[User:anidel|anidel]] 11:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

== Ban anonymous over HTTP, but not HTTPS ==

The set-up of wiki.maemo.org uses a ''reverse proxy'', which uses Apache to forward requests from HTTP to the HTTPS port. This means that all anonymous edits over HTTP show up as 127.0.0.1. However, anonymous edits over HTTPS will feature the (non-repudiable) IP address of the editing user.

This would seem to stop the spam: all the spam to-date (and there's been a lot of it over the few days in the middle of June) has been through HTTP editing, and so a '''temporary''' ban on edits from 127.0.0.1 has eliminated it.

Therefore, we should probably make that ban permanent and deny any anonymous access through HTTP; or we "fix" the problem and expose the external requesting IP to mediawiki over HTTP as well, and then move quickly to ban spamming IPs. Obviously, this will be ineffective if we are hit by a distributed spam botnet.
''--[[User:jaffa|Jaffa]] 17:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)''
:Having said that, if there's a suitable CAPTCHA-type system or plugin we can easily deploy, that'd also be effective. However, if it's non-trivial, I wouldn't say the investment of effort in it was worthwhile (IMHO). --[[User:jaffa|Jaffa]] 17:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

== Proposal ==

This was a [http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-users/2008-June/021627.html proposal sent to maemo-users]. Proposing to continue the discussion here until agreement.--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 21:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Frantisek Dufka wrote:
:The only argument left which I do agree with is additional work for 
:implementing captcha and fixing occasional vandalism if it won't be 100% 
:bulletproof. But maybe we already wasted more time in this dicussion 
:that it would take to implement this http://recaptcha.net/plugins/mediawiki/

Probably true.

Proposal: let's go for incremental changes until the satisfactory level.

We had it fully open and we have seen that this is not good enough since
we get spammed and this is just the beginning of a small and young wiki
not much linked.

Next step

Ban anonymous over HTTP, but not HTTPS?

: Done. --[[User:dneary|Dave Neary]] 11:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

If this is not good enough then next step

Captcha

if this is not enough then registration.

About anonymous contributors, I think a wiki doesn't compare to a
mailing list or a bug report tool. A comma, a number, a vowel or a word
might make a lot of sense and be a useful spontaneous contribution in a
wiki. The same cannot be said in other media.

Myself I have edited anonymously in several wikis just for minor fixes,
and I wouldn't have registered to do so.

I was already convinced by Jaffa, Frantisek and
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Captcha . Then
https://wiki.maemo.org/index.php?title=Task%3AMaemo_brand&diff=2641&oldid=2502
came as a proof.  :)

Please note that all contributions to maemo.org wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see maemo.org wiki:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Summary:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.maemo.org/Talk:Meta:Anonymous_editing"

Personal tools

Navigation

Views

Editing Talk:Meta:Anonymous editing

Latest revision		Your text
Line 2:		Line 2:

	lcuk on #maemo had an interesting idea, NIT-based CAPTCHA questions (i.e. What is the codename for Maemo 4.0? Chinook). Of course a regular CAPTCHA system should work fine, but this'd be a nice touch. The CAPTCHA has the nice effect of both not entirely preventing anonymous edits, while hopefully stopping the bots. This should probably come with a strong suggestion for the user to register. —[[User:generalantilles\|GeneralAntilles]] 15:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)		lcuk on #maemo had an interesting idea, NIT-based CAPTCHA questions (i.e. What is the codename for Maemo 4.0? Chinook). Of course a regular CAPTCHA system should work fine, but this'd be a nice touch. The CAPTCHA has the nice effect of both not entirely preventing anonymous edits, while hopefully stopping the bots. This should probably come with a strong suggestion for the user to register. —[[User:generalantilles\|GeneralAntilles]] 15:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
		+

	== Just Say No ==		== Just Say No ==