Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FA Template Protection Bot: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Discussion: cm |
KnightLago (talk | contribs) support |
||
Line 64:
::::The sort of timed attack Iridescent describes is a major concern, and it's not just in the realm of [[WP:BEANS]], but one that's already been attempted at least twice to defeat my own FA protection adminbot. The number of possible attack vectors are increased here since we're dealing an almost unlimited number of templates that could be vandalized, or even new ones created for the purposes of mischief. Chris, you might be able to pick up the solution [http://toolserver.org/~east718?t here]. <tt>:)</tt> <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap">[[user:east718|<big style="color:#900">east718</big>]] // [[user talk:east718|<font color="#090">talk</font>]] // [[special:emailuser/east718|<font color="#4682b4">email</font>]] // 23:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)</small>
:::::That method isnt going to go away - it can happen already and it isnt going to be made worse by this bot. As it stands, vandalism to the FAOTD by this method (adding a template that is already vandalised) is easiyer to deal with than adding an innocuous template then vandalising it. Having the runs more often pretty much gets rid of the latter problem and nothing will top the former except protection/eyes on the page. [[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|<small><sup>Talk</sup></small>]] 06:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't think the timing problem can be solved. No matter what time it is set to run, unless it is set to run continuously, there will be a break where mischief can occur. Since we started this in July, vandalism during the break has only happened once. In that case someone added a template that should have been in the article already and then vandalized it. In response we lowered the duration been protections. Since then I don't recall anymore problems. As for images, we had a discussion about them when we first created the page and decided not to add them unless they became a target. So far they have not. We were primarily concerned with non-free images and fair use, but we also asked what protection of an image would really do, and decided not much. Having worked on the protection page and tweaking with Chris, the bot has my support. [[User:KnightLago|KnightLago]] ([[User talk:KnightLago|talk]]) 15:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
| |||