3 ms·

About 6 months ago, Codeberg removed the repository for the Wikiless project, and IIRC did not offer any explanation to the developer for about 2 weeks. The re

About 6 months ago, Codeberg removed the repository for the Wikiless project, and IIRC did not offer any explanation to the developer for about 2 weeks. The reason was a Wikimedia Foundation request. Edit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301

Rexogamer 4y ago
I would be very surprised if this was the case - the WMF doesn't prohibit alternative front ends in any way, and it doesn't seem to do anything they'd be upset about (unless it allowed people to evade edit blocks, but that seems incredibly doubtful); if anything, surely they'd welcome a project focused on protecting the privacy of its users?
- forgotmypw17 4y ago
  I added the reference link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301
- noirscape 4y ago
  Here's a bit more as to why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35480811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35480811 The project also doesn't actually make clear if it's actually private and not just MITMing it's own users to track them - as has been pointed out on several[0][1] privacy focused browser extensions that haphazardly included Wikiless. [0]: https://framagit.org/tom79/nitterizeme/-/issues/61#note_1122771 https://framagit.org/tom79/nitterizeme/-/issues/61#note_1122... [1]: https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect/issues/232#issuecomment-1027716378 https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect/issues/232#...
rizky05 4y ago
[dead]
ementally 4y ago
Repo is still private and the dev removed all of his updates. https://web.archive.org/web/20221125051241/https://orenom.fi/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221125051241/https://orenom.fi... The repo: https://codeberg.org/orenom/wikiless https://codeberg.org/orenom/wikiless
noirscape 4y ago
There's more to this - Wikiless was an unmodified passthrough proxy that iirc just unloaded a bunch of regular mediawiki JS because the author thought it constituted a privacy violation/they were afraid that for some reason the WMF was tracking them for malicious purposes[0]. On its own, not harmful. That being said, it ran afoul of the WMFs trademarks and was actively confusing people with regular Mediawiki, which is likely what prompted the takedown. You can read the ins and outs on Wikipedias own page about mirrors and forks, there's an explanation listed there[1]. Codeberg likely complied because if you're weighting a vaguely conspiratorial-minded (the developer of Wikiless is a "feds in the walls" type if it wasn't obvious from the previous paragraph) proxy tool against possibly being shut down since you decided to stand up for an easy trademark violation, the choice is easy. [0]: I'd like to note that as far as I can tell, no such tooling exists on Wikipedia, nor does the WMF employ the usual culprit (ad networks) of that kind of nonsense. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/VWXYZ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/VW...
- mort96 4y ago
  That doesn't really change anything? Taking down a repository with no explanation is unacceptable regardless of context.
  - throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
    It sounds like there was an explanation?
  - noirscape 4y ago
    It does change things. Codeberg responded to orenom's request for explanation on the same day (see the archive link in the first source about people mentioning it was taken down) and further detailed it in the subsequent days. That's decent time to respond with an explanation if you don't have a formalized process to deal with this stuff (which given Codeberg is pretty small, seems likely). Very few providers will shoulder the risk of being dragged to court to stand in front of you when legal is involved. Most don't have the funding to go the legal route to begin with, so they just comply. "We'll go to court for you" isn't a selling point of Codeberg, which makes it silly to expect it.
goodpoint 4y ago
Good.

Rexogamer 4y ago

I would be very surprised if this was the case - the WMF doesn't prohibit alternative front ends in any way, and it doesn't seem to do anything they'd be upset about (unless it allowed people to evade edit blocks, but that seems incredibly doubtful); if anything, surely they'd welcome a project focused on protecting the privacy of its users?

forgotmypw17 4y ago
I added the reference link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301
noirscape 4y ago
Here's a bit more as to why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35480811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35480811 The project also doesn't actually make clear if it's actually private and not just MITMing it's own users to track them - as has been pointed out on several[0][1] privacy focused browser extensions that haphazardly included Wikiless. [0]: https://framagit.org/tom79/nitterizeme/-/issues/61#note_1122771 https://framagit.org/tom79/nitterizeme/-/issues/61#note_1122... [1]: https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect/issues/232#issuecomment-1027716378 https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect/issues/232#...

rizky05 4y ago

[dead]

ementally 4y ago

Repo is still private and the dev removed all of his updates. https://web.archive.org/web/20221125051241/https://orenom.fi/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221125051241/https://orenom.fi... The repo: https://codeberg.org/orenom/wikiless https://codeberg.org/orenom/wikiless

noirscape 4y ago

There's more to this - Wikiless was an unmodified passthrough proxy that iirc just unloaded a bunch of regular mediawiki JS because the author thought it constituted a privacy violation/they were afraid that for some reason the WMF was tracking them for malicious purposes[0]. On its own, not harmful. That being said, it ran afoul of the WMFs trademarks and was actively confusing people with regular Mediawiki, which is likely what prompted the takedown. You can read the ins and outs on Wikipedias own page about mirrors and forks, there's an explanation listed there[1]. Codeberg likely complied because if you're weighting a vaguely conspiratorial-minded (the developer of Wikiless is a "feds in the walls" type if it wasn't obvious from the previous paragraph) proxy tool against possibly being shut down since you decided to stand up for an easy trademark violation, the choice is easy. [0]: I'd like to note that as far as I can tell, no such tooling exists on Wikipedia, nor does the WMF employ the usual culprit (ad networks) of that kind of nonsense. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/VWXYZ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/VW...

mort96 4y ago
That doesn't really change anything? Taking down a repository with no explanation is unacceptable regardless of context.
- throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
  It sounds like there was an explanation?
- noirscape 4y ago
  It does change things. Codeberg responded to orenom's request for explanation on the same day (see the archive link in the first source about people mentioning it was taken down) and further detailed it in the subsequent days. That's decent time to respond with an explanation if you don't have a formalized process to deal with this stuff (which given Codeberg is pretty small, seems likely). Very few providers will shoulder the risk of being dragged to court to stand in front of you when legal is involved. Most don't have the funding to go the legal route to begin with, so they just comply. "We'll go to court for you" isn't a selling point of Codeberg, which makes it silly to expect it.

goodpoint 4y ago

Good.