On 7/19/13, Holbrook Bunting <holbrook@dal.net> wrote:
hostname at anytime, I am thinking why not do this on a global scale?
The idea that a CSop can take action doesn't do much to address the possibility of abuse. Basically, there are a limited number of CSops, whom additional work should not be created for on a daily basis ---- that is, the use of CSops to correct problems should be considered a contingency or an emergency response in case of extreme unexpected circumstances, not an appropriate system for deterring or preventing abuse on a daily basis. IRC operations staff involvement, should always be kept an available option to deal with emergencies, but it should not be an excuse for failing to insist that possible intrinsic avenues for abuse be appropriately controlled and minimized ----- automated systems should resist abuse, and this makes them more scale able, and capable of servicing larger number of users more reliably. -- The most likely kind of abuse I see with masking is -- ban evasion, or suppression of the user's real host, so they could rejoin channels later using a different identity. To allow users to have custom hosts on any global scale; I do believe this calls for having some form of "IRC User" reputation system; to restrict the capability to "trusted users", such as nicknames with a known history: nicknames registered for a significant length of time, that are able to get other IRC users to vouch for/endorse them. Then I would recommend that there be an automated system IRC users could use to report suspected abuses of masking and other service features. And an automated mechanism for channel operators to make an "Official inquiry" through services, about the real hostname behind a masked user visiting their channel -- -JH