Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:04:52 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T5075, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 3075 - sysop-only pages
sysop-only pages
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
All All
: Lowest enhancement with 2 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on: 1924
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-08-08 18:17 UTC by Effeietsanders
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:04 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Description Effeietsanders 2005-08-08 18:17:16 UTC
At nl.wp we have the "Kluis"(in English:The Safe). We keep there important documents
( like a list of phonenumbers, emails with information about the use of copyright 
photo's, information about the chatchannel), of whitch it is not the meaning that 
everyone can read it. The idea is that admins can read and adept these files. Now we 
have a pretty barbaric system. We upload a .zip-file with a password in itself. But 
it works very bad. And information is very easy lost. 

Is it possible to make a secured area in wikipedia, in which only sysops can enter, 
the changes do not appear in the recent changes list? In here we can place private 
information, reachable in case we might need it. If this works fine, we can also 
store the discussions we had per modmail (sysop-mail), and of whitch it is not ment 
that everyone can read it, but we can find it, if necessary. Could this be created? 
It would be a great deal. 
thanks, Effeietsanders (nl.wikipedia-sysop)
Comment 1 Brion Vibber 2005-08-08 18:19:17 UTC
Wikipedia is committed to open access and open discussion.

A private sysops-only area is contrary to the project's ideals and goals, and would not be acceptable.
Comment 2 jeroen.vanrietpaap 2005-08-08 18:42:41 UTC
I disagree with Brion here. This has nothing to do with "open access and 
open discussion", but with keeping semsitive data out of the way. We (on 
nl:) do that allready with this .zip-file, but like to have a more 
secure and professional solution. 
So what you (Brion) is saying is that we should publish our e.g. 
phonenumbers for the whole world to see. I think you understand that 
this not a smart thing to do. You can't push the "open access and open 
discussion"-philosophy (that I absolutely support) over the edge. Why 
not give the root passwords from the Linux server park to everyone? Off 
course we don't do that, because we have a security policy, the same 
applies (on a smaller scale) with sensitive moderator/sysop-data. 
I think this can easily be done. Right now it is possible to deny 
read-access for certain user-groups, wiki wide. It should be easy to 
have a few blacklisted pages that only can be read and modified by the 
Jeroenvrp [[:nl:Gebruiker:Jeroenvrp]] 
Comment 3 jeroen.vanrietpaap 2005-08-08 18:47:16 UTC
Extra note: 
Off course changes on these "sysop"-pages should not be listed for 
"normal"-users on recentchanges. 
Comment 4 Brion Vibber 2005-08-08 19:09:46 UTC
These are not part of the wiki.
Comment 5 T. Gries 2005-08-08 19:32:21 UTC

You could install a separate NLSysopWiki somewhere (i.e. not being part of a
Wikipedia spawn) and make the access to that Wiki password protected.
Installation of a fresh wiki is usually less than 30 seconds work.

Wouldn't that solve all you problems ?
Comment 6 Effeietsanders 2005-08-08 19:39:16 UTC
Brion, you just say you don't want to do this. But can you give reasoneble 
arguments? The argument of "wiki should be open" is just incorrect imho. We deal 
here with information whitch can not be shared with normal users, but has to be 
accessable in certain situations. If we need the information of de kluis, or if 
we have to put extra information into it, it brings now a great risk of loosing 
other information. This should not be so. Wiki is for information, and open. But 
to let wiki funtion properly, we have to make certain information whitch cannot 
be shared with all users open for as mutch users as possible. If we leave it this 
situation, we just increase the openness of wiki, because we cannot let everyone 
know we save these things, because they can very easely hack a zipfile. I already 
understood you are against it, but please clarify your "decision" to give us no 
chance to explain our point, to defend our view, and to open information to a 
limited group, instead of a even more limited group. Thanks. Effeietsanders
Comment 7 Remy Overkempe 2005-08-08 19:41:57 UTC
I support this idea. I think it is a good contribution to the project. I know,
we are an open wiki, but sometimes it is necessary to protect some parts to
preserve wikipedia. And i think the Kluis/Safe isn't protected enough from

I also agree with comment #2 from Jeroenvrp.

Remy Overkempe/Empoor ([[:nl:Gebruiker:Empoor]])
Comment 8 Remy Overkempe 2005-08-08 21:10:03 UTC
I really don't think this is SO MUCH against wiki, that it isn't even an option.
This idea doesn't mean the whole wiki would be protected, just these files, that
are suppose to be protected. Or else they can be used against the project.
Comment 9 Brion Vibber 2005-08-09 00:28:01 UTC
The problem is that you're not just asking for a little place for a few people to 
share their phone numbers with each other. You're asking for an entire section 
of the wiki which is inaccessible to users who are not members of the "cabal".

That's not what a wiki is, it's not how it works, and it creates and enforces a 
stricter user access hierarchy which is contrary to the way this project is 
supposed to be organized. There is no particular reason to believe that such a 
restricted area, once added, would be used only for sharing private contact 

Additionally your secret sysop pages would be accessible to everyone in the 
next week's public backup dump, which is probably not something you'd like.

If you want to have private conversations, do it in private as individuals, where 
you can maintain your privacy.
Comment 10 Rob Church 2005-12-18 15:59:55 UTC
Reopening to correct the resolution.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.