Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Archives/Closed/2011/July

201.220.208.0/20


Reason: Checkuser shows that there's a lot - and I mean a LOT - of people on this range that appear to be coming from many different countries, most of them not Cuba, where this IP range is apparently allocated. The range is apparently assigned to the Cuban National Center for Health Sciences Information, though, so I'm not entirely sure. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 01:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weird. I see that there is a lot of synergy between the five ip users on 201.220.215.0/27.  However, some google searching on those same IPs shows a person who self identifies as a Pakistani medical student in Cuba.  Most of the edits elsewhere on that block seem consistent with that identity.  No sign of proxies I could find on one IP in that group that I checked.  A lot of the other contributions on the range seem compatible with the same.  So, I'm not seeing any strong suggestions of a proxy....  Sailsbystars (talk) 02:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * notaproxy Sailsbystars (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

85.241.206.218


IP is edit warring on the article Pro-life movement which is under general 1RR sanctions for abortion-related topics.

The IP is blacklisted at seven lists. Binksternet (talk) 01:00, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * Not a proxy as far as I can tell. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  13:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * notaproxy I agree, looks to be a normal dynamic IP adress. Sailsbystars (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

66.151.103.8


http://toadress.com 66.151.103.8 redirects to Zscaler anonymizing proxy gateway. See Zscaler Training "Zscaler is a huge virtual web proxy on the Internet" and Zscaler Press Release "With Zscaler, each of its 13 Internet gateways simply forward Internet-bound traffic to the Zscaler cloud".

Reason: disruptive editing, edit warring and IP socking (using now blocked IP 71.191.31.183) on Zvonko Bušić JoeSperrazza (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd actually lean towards not a proxy, at least of the open sort. This looks like a corporate gateway (i.e. web filtering services) and requires authentication to access (just tested).  If it's being abused often, I'd recommend perhaps a softblock.  However, a hard block would be inappropriate as this appears to be a closed and legitimate proxy.  Sailsbystars (talk) 20:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It is definitely not an open proxy, and does require an account to authenticate. It does, however, anonymize one's originating IP. If the former is sufficient to not list, apologies for listing here. JoeSperrazza (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, out usual policy is to not block closed proxies with long-term blocks. Closed proxies are treated just like a normal IP address in terms of blocking policy, the idea being it's roughly equivalent to someone switching between work IP address vs. home IP address. I will add one note that it looks like this particular proxy may have been open briefly in the past when some unfortunate sysadmin improperly configured the router, but it appears to be closed down at this point.  I'll close this report after waiting a day or two to see if any other page-watchers have anything to add.  Sailsbystars (talk) 00:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * notaproxy Sailsbystars (talk) 23:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)