Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests/Archives/11

166.137.156.0/26


Reason: Range is being used by blocked sockmaster User:Marburg72; geolocation tools indicate this range may be an open proxy. Edits are at and. Thank you. -- Dianna (talk) 15:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not open proxies. These are highly dynamic cell network ranges for AT&T.... the only thing that makes me not rule out a proxy entirely is that the hostname seems to have "server" in it, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence of an actual server running....  Sailsbystars (talk) 05:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

86.36.66.12


Reason: Requested unblock at User talk:Haberstr.


 * 08:37, 27 December 2012 ProcseeBot blocked 86.36.66.12 for 59 days as a blocked proxy, citing 86.36.69.165:80. I have confirmed that 86.36.69.165:80 is an open proxy, though connection is very unreliable, with only one successful connection out of six attempts. However, I have not been able to confirm whether or not the proxy exits at 86.36.66.12. http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/86.36.66.12 says that the IP address is a confirmed proxy server. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am no longer sure that I have confirmed that 86.36.69.165:80 is an open proxy. I may have merely picked up a cached copy of a page from before my attempt to connect via the proxy. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Proxy closed as of end of December. Not currently functional, unblock needed.  Sailsbystars (talk) 01:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Unblocked. Materialscientist (talk) 01:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

216.244.71.142


Reason: Disruption-only account making inflammatory comments in articles and edit summaries. Mathsci (talk) 07:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * IP is an open proxy, thus blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 07:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

218.108.168.166


Reason: This checks out to be an open proxy making disruptive and trolling edits. This is undoubtedly either a site-banned user or a community banned user. Mathsci (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Wide open proxy on port 80; was able to connect. I've blocked the IP.  Kuru   (talk)  02:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

77.246.73.11


Reason: Requested unblock via UTRS #5824.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * IP appears proxy-free (unable to use proxy). Looks like it's been fixed as of Dec. 28.  Please go ahead and unblock.  Sailsbystars (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Unblocked. Materialscientist (talk) 23:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

220.255.2.54


Both the above IP address and appear to be making the same edits at the same time. Suspect this is the user flitting about a proxy. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * Not open proxies. These are Singaporean IPs (singnet, etc.). They can be rapidly reassigned (down to about a minute in my observation), though within a small subrange. Those above are maybe the same person on different PCs. Materialscientist (talk) 14:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

89.238.153.10


This IP is currently directly blocked as a sock of User:Wikinger, and indirectly as part of the proxy rangeblock of 89.238.153.0/24. Both blocks are from 2010. However, according to a request received through UTRS, it appears that 89.238.153.10 was reassigned to St Mary's School (Calne) six months ago, and the school have requested that it be unblocked to allow editing. (Based on the UTRS request there appears to be a COI issue as well, to be dealt with separately.) I'm putting this here for review, so that those with more experience in this area can verify whether or not the proxy block and/or sockblock is still appropriate. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  09:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Requested unblock/comment.
 * Appears to be closed now. ( X! ·  talk )  · @823  · 18:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

141.0.10.168


Recently used in an edit war on 2013 India–Pakistan border incident article, according to this it is a confirmed proxy server. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Another one, same MO. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * And another Darkness Shines (talk) 21:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Another, can we get a range block on this guy? Darkness Shines (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't block these I'm afraid, these are a special case. Opera Mini is a nifty little web browser that compresses traffic between the phone and a server to save on a person's data allowance and thence transmits the data uncompressed from that server through the interwebs.  I actually use it myself a fair bit.  However, it's treated like any other mobile ISP.  Highly dynamic IPs, so the best we can do is a short anonblock for the most serious situations so as not to block legitimate editors.   Sailsbystars (talk) 03:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

82.141.157.174


Reason: Requested unblock via UTRS.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 20:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Looked into this a bit... it's definitely not a normal computer, but I'm not clear it's an open proxy (might be a caching/filtering server for that particular ISP). I can't find anything remotely resembling an open proxy server on it and I even resorted to the last-ditch effort of running a port scan. Pretty much everything is closed and firewalled hard core. I would ping the blocking admin via email (beans and such) and ask them for more details on the block, but would lean towards unblocking unless there was some specific technical feature I'm missing here.  Sailsbystars (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like it may be a router or firewall at this point in time. I believe when I first examined it, I concurred with User:ProcseeBot that it was a proxy or being used as one - but things change.  I don't mind unblocking and monitoring it.  Dreadstar  ☥   20:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dreadstar, I'll close the UTRS request. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

192.81.249.23


Reason: Another apparent proxy ip trolling on an arbcom case page. Mathsci (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * A tor router, blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

192.34.62.248


Reason: Seems to be the same user as in the last report, with prior connected trolling on Nyttend's talk page about the same arbcom case and the same matter (again referring to my talk page). The user uses UK spelling ("scrutinised"), so it's not too hard to guess who it might be. Mathsci (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Same as above. Materialscientist (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your help. Mathsci (talk) 23:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

85.24.184.226


Reason: More trolling related to the current Doncram arbcom case and the use of tor nodes. Seems to be the same user as in the previous reports because the theme is identical. This is the usual banned user following my edits and trying to make mischief. Mathsci (talk) 17:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Tor, blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 22:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

204.101.237.139


Reason: Open proxy being used to make trolling remarks in a current arbcom case. Mathsci (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked into this a bit on my own before it popped up here. I really don't think this is a proxy.... looks much more like someone editing through their mobile phone.  Is there any evidence this is a proxy other than behavioral?  Sailsbystars (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It is listed as a "confirmed proxy server" here, the "whois" tool on the special contributions page. Mathsci (talk) 18:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah that website's so called "confirmed proxy servers" frequently aren't.... I don't know what their algorithm is, but it's not very good.... Sailsbystars (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

220.255.2.123


Reason: Per UTRS #6110, please check if this IP is still accessible. In particular, hardblocking a SingNet IP is probably a bad idea, even if it is an open proxy. There could be innocent residential users with no way to disable the proxy that someone else is running. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 19:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not an open proxy, unblocked, please apply anonblock if needed. Materialscientist (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

87.195.253.3


Reason: IP has only been used for vandalism - multiple previous blocks by TorNodeBot can be seen here--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked as tor (see, e.g. http://87.195.253.3/). Materialscientist (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, that reply was faster than greased lightning! --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:26, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

37.153.194.171


Reason: Suspicious edits - MrX 00:39, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked as tor. Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

46.59.74.15


Reason: Suspicious edits - MrX 02:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Same as above. I have semiprotected the target. Materialscientist (talk) 02:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. - MrX 02:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

201.18.231.46


Reason: Suspicious edits (tendentious edits/vandalism)
 * Already blocked by Elockid as an open proxy (I haven't checked it). Materialscientist (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

62.212.82.105


Reason: Requested unblock via UTRS #6364. The IP is part of this rangeblock and claims they need unblocking to work on a tutorial assignment. --Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 00:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Why not create them an account? Materialscientist (talk) 00:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I could provide them IPBE but that's generally only extended to trusted users. The UTRS set-up is pretty basic for these requests, they go into the proxy check holding queue until a check is run via WP:OPP to see if the proxy block is still necessary. If the block is necessary and the request has come from someone meeting IPBE criteria then we can discuss exemption with the user. --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 00:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This webhosting range has a long echo of past proxies, and some are still active (http://prx.centrump2p.com/english/, etc). They are mostly in the 62.212.7x.xxx range, thus narrowing the block from 62.212.64.0/19 to 62.212.64.0/20 is an option open for discussion. Two worrying things are (i) the reporting IP 62.212.82.105 itself has the 8080 port open, which looks like a trace of past or future proxy, (ii) tutorial assignment on en.wiki from the Netherlands sounds slightly odd to me. Materialscientist (talk) 06:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There are a few things that don't quite add up with the unblock reuqest; I'd rather play it safe than sorry so I've declined to unblock.--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 20:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

217.174.249.169


Reason: Requested unblock (note the range has been blocked globally since June 2012).--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 00:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I would decline - there are active proxies in the range (e.g. http://cooloo.org, though it currently exits at another IP); 217.174.249.169 itself is a multisite webhost, i.e. can turn into an open proxy anytime. Just my opinion. (I'll comment on 62.212.82.105 above later today). Materialscientist (talk) 01:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Noted and declined. --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 20:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

192.20.246.138


Reason: Requested unblock via UTRS #6490.--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 20:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Decline - still an open proxy on the same port (used by the blocking bot). Materialscientist (talk) 22:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

63.226.155.173



 * Reason: Requested unblock at User talk:63.226.155.173 The person requesting an unblock says that the IP address is no longer hosting a proxy, and from what I have been able to find it looks at though that may well be true, but I would be grateful if someone more knowledgeable about proxies could give a second opinion.


 * Block log entry: 06:05, 22 December 2012 Materialscientist (talk | contribs | block) blocked 63.226.155.173 (talk) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 year ( : http://63.226.155.173/p/)

JamesBWatson (talk) 22:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The proxy is gone, thus it's Ok with me to unblock. There are a couple of open ports, but I don't see a proxy there. Materialscientist (talk) 22:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Unblocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

2.133.93.162


Reason: Suspicious edits - MrX 18:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Confirmed open proxy on port 9090, needs block of order months to a year (unclear how dynamic the address is). Sailsbystars (talk) 18:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * for 1 year. AGK  [•] 20:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

85.24.184.185


Available tools show this is likely an open proxy. Thanks. -- Dianna (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Confirmed Tor exit node. Needs a month or two of blocking.  Sailsbystars (talk) 18:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * for three months. -- Dianna (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

216.81.94.75


- MrX 21:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * Closed without checking. Sensitive IP address (belongs to DHS).  Strong hints of COI, but if you want this blocked you're going to have to talk to the Foundation.  And need a helluva lot more specific evidence.  Sailsbystars (talk) 21:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand. I was not aware of those exceptions. - MrX 23:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

27.114.168.177


Requesting verification of a Procseebot block, given that one of the users affected by this proxy block is currently requesting an unblock and claims not to be aware of any proxy. Can't see evidence either way, myself, but then I don't know too much about proxies. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Requested unblock.
 * It's safe to unblock.  It was a proxy when blocked, but no longer (probably has changed IPs and/or been closed).  Sailsbystars (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Concur and unblocked. Materialscientist (talk) 23:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

‎88.159.134.224


Reason: Appears to be listed as an http proxy on internet and there is a response when 88.159.134.224:80 is placed in browser window. IP is edit warring on Race and intelligence. Mathsci (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * IP is an open proxy, thanks, blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

201.76.185.214


Reason: Admits in their first edit that they are using a proxy server. The user is evading scrutiny because the VPN range 101.0.71.0/24 they previously used had been blocked after problemtic editing. Mathsci (talk) 06:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked by Elockid for a year as an open proxy. Couldn't get it to proxy myself but there was more than enough information out there indicating an active proxy and there was some really really strange behavoir on port 80.  Sailsbystars (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

69.130.245.219


Reason: Suspicious edits

Edits infrequently in my main topic areas (sports and politics), but made two edits in June 2012 (one to Chris Paul, the other to 110th United States Congress) that were immediately reverted by another user with the edit summary "revert blatant vandalism". Also, similar IP address (69.130.245.177) was blocked indefinitely in October 2008 after a CheckUser revealed it was being used by a banned user for disruption. --184.6.222.14 (talk) 15:34, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No edits from this IP. Materialscientist (talk) 23:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not checked since no edits and a cursory review shows it to be an unlikely candidate for proxy. Sailsbystars (talk) 21:15, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

223.4.205.37


Blocked by Procseebot on 31 Jan for two months; claims on talk page not to be an open proxy. JohnCD (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Decline. I have just connected through the port specified by the bot. Materialscientist (talk) 23:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

216.131.127.86


unblockerdirect.info is no longer functional. –BuickCenturyDriver 21:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Requested unblock.
 * Yet it is a webhost with very dubious hosted sites. Materialscientist (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

203.174.79.131


I got one of those "somebody tried to get your password" media wiki emails, and it said this IP was the source of the request Trying, however incompetently, to hack an admin account seems pretty abusive to me, the geolocation says this is a confirmed proxy server in Japan. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Something is very fishy with this IP. It comes from an electric power company in Japan.... it's clearly some sort of gateway server, but it's not obviously open.  Sailsbystars (talk) 05:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's been assigned to something akin to a hotel per the latest WHOIS

--184.6.222.14 (talk) 23:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Not a hotel, data-hotel.net is the name of the ISP that provides service to the power company. I don't see any open ports either.  Sounds like an employee, not a remote user.  Likely an internal firewall/gateway. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 00:47, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * data-hotel sounds like a server farm, however I can't see that it's open. No obvious action to take here - closing. -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

111.161.30.218


Reason: Appears to be an open proxy from China. The sole edit is to troll around WP:ARBR&I in a creepy and disruptive way that is typical of the banned user, who has used anonymising proxies in the past. Mathsci (talk) 03:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I also found this identification as a proxy on the web. Mathsci (talk) 07:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I did discover that the IP 111.161.30.230 is a proxy on port 80/tcp. I scanned the ports with nmap having found it on this list. Mathsci (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It exits on 113.25.65.103, which I've blocked. You'll find 111.161.30.230 as a proxy on Google but hardly 113.25.65.103. This is a usual problem with tunnel proxies, i.e. 111.161.30.218 might be one (exit port), but without knowing the entry it is hard to tell for sure. Materialscientist (talk) 10:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There's some evidence on the internets that this IP was in fact a proxy. However, right now it's coming back that the IP address is down.  So I'll check again to see if the host is up later.  n.b. to myself this is coming from a pretty darn quiet range, and the edits that exist are looking like a non-proxy-hosting range...  Sailsbystars (talk) 07:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it's still down to me but it's obviously still getting used and FP@S has blocked it... it's certainly passes the WP:DUCK test, but the exact mechanism is elusive (possibly an exit server of some source). If it comes back after FP's block expires, it's probably worth blocking for a month or two, but no longer because it appears to be a fairly dynamic range.  Sailsbystars (talk) 18:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the rate that this is spewing spam, I think we can safely declare it a proxy and put it away for a year even if we can't figure out the tunnel entrance. Given the additional proxies on the range above, we might want to rangeblock 111.161.30.0/24 as well, as the collateral damage is minimal but the potential for disruption is high.  Sailsbystars (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked 111.161.30.218 per the off-wiki spambot activity, but not the range - it's just me, I don't mind anyone blocking it. Materialscientist (talk) 13:06, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

216.191.214.90


Possible proxy, harassing a user. Could you check it out please? I have blocked 48 hr for personal attacks. Thank you. - Dianna (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hardly. Only one open port, and not proxy-like. Allstream Corp., clean blacklist. We can never be 100% sure that an IP was not an open proxy when you blocked it though. Materialscientist (talk) 10:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. -- Dianna (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

206.47.78.150


Reason: This IP has been blocked in the past as a proxy (it seems the entry point could be 206.47.78.149:80). The IP is being used at present for trolling on an arbcom case page. Mathsci (talk) 23:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Host not up/all ports closed, looks like a cell network. In fact it comes from the same provider as 204.101.237.139, which was also trolling the same arbcom pages.  I think you have a good case for sockpuppetry/avoiding scrutiny, but it doesn't look like proxies. Probably too much range for an anon rangeblock...    Sailsbystars (talk) 01:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and PS, Open proxy isn't necessarily grounds for an instant revert. I asked about it a while ago and there was no consensus (although also not a terribly large amount of input).  Sailsbystars (talk) 01:22, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I reverted. But on the evidence talk page this user, using the 2nd IP, was already asked by a clerk to use their main registered account. Their contribution was later hatted by AGK. Mathsci (talk) 01:30, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

194.146.198.70


This IP appears to be an open proxy. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  00:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked as tor. Materialscientist (talk) 01:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

209.226.201.228


This IP appears to be an open proxy. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  01:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I see no evidence of an open proxy. Toronto Airport PC - more likely a public terminal. Materialscientist (talk) 01:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

168.94.245.6


Unblock request on talkpage claims that this IP is not a proxy. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  08:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Requested unblock.
 * Not seeing a proxy or any strong evidence for proxy (not open on standard proxy ports), but I would ping Elen (the blocking admin) before an unblock because the block is a bit irregular (several weeks after most recent activity). Sailsbystars (talk) 08:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Unblocked after consultation with Elen. Closing.... Sailsbystars (talk) 01:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

202.105.113.132


Reason: The SPI clerk confirmed that this was an open proxy on 8080. It is currently being used by a newly created account PsychKitten, that appears to have been created to bypass a block of an IP range by Future Perfect at Sunrise. Mathsci (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yup, Spitfire has that one right. I'd give it a six monther...  Sailsbystars (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked for 2 years, because of stable open-proxy port (see block log). Materialscientist (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

91.121.166.108


Reason: Suspicious edits

Thank you - MrX 03:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Nuke from orbit the entire range 91.121.0.0/16 for two years or more. This particular hosting provider (OVH) has a long history of wikitrouble.  I didn't even bother checking.  In fact the whole range  used to be blocked.  It appears the trouble hasn't ceased, ergo, someone needs to set us up the block. Sailsbystars (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Nuked. We might get something like User_talk:91.121.6.61 in the future, but the range is rotten, 91.121.0.0/19 was indeffed previously. Materialscientist (talk) 09:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

200.79.224.72


This IP appears to be an open proxy. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  23:02, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This does not seem to be a proxy. I note that 200.79.224.71 was also used for similarly disruptive edits a few months ago.  Possibly an internet cafe on a dynamic range.  Not closing the case yet because it could also be a Tor node but it's not up at all right now.   Sailsbystars (talk) 01:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I got nuthin... marking closed. Sailsbystars (talk) 02:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

199.58.84.20


Reason: Requested unblock per UTRS #6803. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 11:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Soooooo.... this is a complicated case. The IP in question seems to belong to a quite legitimate and useful closed-proxy type service.  Unfortunately, that IP is smack in the middle of a range full of nastiness.  So, we can't really unblock the range.  So, if this is an experienced editor, they might have reason to request WP:IPBE (although it appears the criteria for that right are getting stricter after it was recently mis-used).  If it's not, then the best solution is for them to disable the proxy service.  Sailsbystars (talk) 01:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Can we reduce the range to a soft block? (Also, they claim to not be using a proxy.) -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Unequivocally a free (aka open) proxy program. Your unblock requester is at best unaware of their internet connection, and at worst actively trying to deceive you. Sailsbystars (talk) 04:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

208.38.59.163


Reason: Suspicious edits

Thank you - MrX 02:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see any sign of an open proxy on this IP. Materialscientist (talk) 10:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Concur, closing. Sailsbystars (talk) 02:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

178.254.20.37


Apparent open proxy. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  09:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * Tor node, 6 month block warranted. Sailsbystars (talk) 15:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked, thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 23:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for all your hard work protecting the project! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

31.7.56.0/21


See unblock request at User talk:Siriusly55. JohnCD (talk) 20:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Resolved - user says: "skype can be very slow here so about 10 days ago I went through a proxy and it seems to have stayed on... I honestly had no idea it was still connected to the proxy in the background - please do accept my apologies." JohnCD (talk) 10:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

83.34.172.50


An apparent dynamic proxy used for obscene edits. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  22:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * I don't see a proxy mechanism at this IP. Materialscientist (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

72.160.98.133


Blocked as probable open proxy in 2006, but says it has been allocated to him as a static address. JohnCD (talk) 08:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * They speak truly, unblock should be given post-haste. Sailsbystars (talk) 15:39, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have unblocked the IP. JohnCD (talk) 15:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

64.138.212.37


IP used for vandalism only. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  06:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Suspicious edits
 * Why this report? I see nothing suspicious (proxy-wise) with this IP. Materialscientist (talk) 08:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed, no evidence that it's a proxy.... looks like your run of the mill IP, possibly a school. Checked a few standard proxy ports and found nada, in addition to the circumstantial evidence against.  Sailsbystars (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * According to this site its a confirmed proxy server. http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/64.138.212.37 GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  00:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We don't know how those sites verify proxies, and how often do they update their results, i.e. this may only be a weak hint, not an evidence. Materialscientist (talk) 00:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay, thanks for your time. I wish I had better tools to help me identify them, sorry if I wasted your time. Cheers! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  01:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

46.20.33.103


Obvious proxy, Netco solutions. http://www.netcosolutions.com/ GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  02:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Reason: Suspicious edits
 * 2 year block needed on 46.20.33.0/25, as apparently netcosolutions is a front company for an ever-problematic proxy service called... well, I think linking to it would get caught up in the spam filter, but I can provide info by email if any passing admin needs more assurances. Sailsbystars (talk) 06:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Concur. Blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 08:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

80.83.21.2


Reason: Suspicious edits Thank you - MrX 18:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not an open proxy or tor node. Sailsbystars (talk) 22:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

207.195.240.33


Reason: Suspicious edits found as a part of a sleeper sock investigation, related to the stalker Runtshit, that has struck recently.

URL: 207.195.240.33, previous block due to anonymizer.com

This IP reverted about 16 edits in a row in an automated fashion, then has been silent since 2006. In range of known stalker (Runtshit)

DIFF

Patriot1010 (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Stale IP with no sign of an open proxy. Materialscientist (talk) 23:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed - that is why they call them sleepers!Patriot1010 (talk) 23:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sleeppers are IPs or accounts ready for action. This one is not. Materialscientist (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Nah, with vpns and 8 websites like this one, one could use one IP a year and not have to use it again for 8 years. Blocking this obvious one cuts a year off of the rotation. What you are talking about is exactly what a sleeper wants you to believe.....Patriot1010 (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You seem quite knowledgeable in this topic. Could you please provide the mechanism and entry port for this supposed proxy? That would be very helpful. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 03:14, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not sure of he technical name, but this ip traces to an ip - then gets redirected to other site (spoof - redirected?) - but from the other direction, does not get redirected to the spoof site and goes straight to wikipedia. Notice the robotex says the ip is not defined, and the google link for this address states proxy. Patriot1010 (talk) 15:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm, this IP is apparently in range of 207.195.240.0/20 which is supposedly blockedSpecial:BlockList/207.195.240.33...yet when you use OverlordQ's tools with this IP

http://toolserver.org/~overlordq/cgi-bin/rangecheck.cgi?lang=en&family=wikipedia&ip=207.195.240.0%2F20


 * you have about 50 ips back there with a few hundred edits.... of course they are ALL from 2006 like the ip I have............who was it that said "Stale IP with no sign of an open proxy" don't need a block? Oh! That was Materialscientist a couple days ago. And these seem as if they are parked, and "ready for action" Wonder who said that too.


 * But here's the thing I don't get: If the IP I have is from 2006, and ALL the IPs behind the blocked IP of 207.195.240.0/20 are from 2006, it is within range of the IP I have........Why is 207.195.240.0/20 blocked indefinitely I wonder and the one I found will not be considered.......hmmm...........Patriot1010 (talk) 21:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

You've just explained why it won't be considered: it's within the range of blocked IPs. It's already blocked. You are asking us to consider whether we should block an IP address because you suspect it to be a proxy, when the whole range was blocked in 2008 for that very reason, and has remained blocked ever since. Case closed. WilliamH (talk) 22:31, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm formally marking this as closed, for basically what WilliamH said. However, an aside is that we don't do indef rangeblocks anymore, and this has been blocked for long enough that the block should be reviewed at some point in the near future and removed or replaced with a more definite block. Sailsbystars (talk) 22:36, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

112.213.97.69


Reason: Last in a series of open proxies used by prior to the creation of his account. Previous IPs were blocked as open proxies by Elockid. Mathsci (talk) 11:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Verified, blocked, thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

156.144.250.239


Reason: Suspicious edits Thank you - MrX 15:34, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

IP is a static address assigned to a company in Indiana; request for proxy check should be closed as frivolous.

--184.6.222.14 (talk) 00:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not gonna label frivolous, but yeah, it looks like a corporate gateway with no evidence of an open proxy, so I'll close.... thanks for reminding me this was still open. Sailsbystars (talk) 03:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

85.17.143.185


Reason: Per UTRS #7182. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:14, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Haven't completed a check yet, but I'd lean towards a declined request because it's actually blocked globally (so we can't do anything here anyways) and the particular owner it belongs to is notorious for proxy-hosting.... Sailsbystars (talk) 18:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This IP is definitely a proxy server. The server is up and appears to be running a proxy on 8088. It's unclear whether the proxy is open or not.  I was able to connect to wikipedia using it, but then it req'd user name and password.  So, it's possible this is a closed proxy rather than an open one.  However, given that it's in a range of nastiness and blocked globally, there's nothing more to be done here.  Sailsbystars (talk) 07:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

83.149.2.85


This is a returning user, and will be blocked anyway, but curious if this is an open proxy. Geolocate calls it a proxy, but it has said strange things before. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, this is another case of "random sites on the internet aren't always right about proxies." In this case it looks to be a Russian cell network, which seems to be entirely consistent with the editting POV....  Sailsbystars (talk) 07:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

207.195.240.0/20


This IP range is not a proxy, it is a customer-route-object- to Global-Tac http://route.robtex.com/207.195.240.0-20---customer-route-object-global-tac-24731.html

It USED to be affiliated with Anonomizer.com, but since then has been changed. Please note the latest change, with ticket number.Robtex Link

AS53559 Customer Route Object - Global TAC (24731) changed:	routing(at)americanis.net 20110302 #23:58:35Z descr:	Customer Route Object - Global TAC (24731) mnt-by:	MAINT-ADN-WEST source:	RADB warning:	RIPE flags used with a traditional server.

Also if you note, the little circle is NOT filled in for Global TAC, which indicates an anonymous proxy. Thus, this IP range is NOT an anonymous proxy, it is a customer care route for a US Business locate here, in my home country, the U.S.A.!

This makes sense, since the block was from waaay back in 2008, and there were edits from 2006.Overlord Tools IP range Let Freedom of Speech ring once again in the U.S.A.! Patriot1010 (talk) 17:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Reason: Requested unblock.
 * sooooo..... the block expires in a few months anyway. Why the urgency for unblocking right now?  You haven't made clear the reason for filing this request other than "the ownership of this block has changed."  Sailsbystars (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Why not? Please ask Deskana for details. Thank you. Patriot1010 (talk) 17:42, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, this IP listed above said it went to ), but a simple google search states it goes to https://www.google.com/search?q=207.195.240.1 with the first hit stating "Feb 8, 2007 – 207.195.240.1 Owner is Global Tac, LLC USA. 207.195.240.1 is in USA. Ip Lookup Location More IP Information for 207.195.240.1 on Myip.ms." Wow that's weird - this IP was always going to Global Tec! At least since 2007 - funny the block was in 2008.......hmmm......that's oddPatriot1010 (talk) 19:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait, a few requests above this you requested that this IP be blocked. Now you're requesting that it be unblocked?  I really don't think you understand what your'e talking about... The owner of the block rents out individual hosts, to other companies such as anonymizer.com.  So the owner in the whois was never anonymizer.com.  Also, please only edit one request for the same range at a time.... Sailsbystars (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Not a proxy, and no reason to include an entire range. Block was for ) in Germany. As everyone can see, this IP has changed to Customer Route Object - Global TAC (24731) in the US, and was confirmed changed by an administrator of a private corporation. (See the address per the proxyip4 template above). So unless the previously blocked user moved to the US and now works for Global Tac, which is far from likely, lets unblock this range!

This form was filled ou correctly and completely. Thank You! Patriot1010 (talk) 18:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC) Reason: Requested unblock.
 * That's odd, same block log as 207.195.240.33...except I requested a block for 207.195.240.33DIFF 195.240.33...DIFF:207.195.240.0/20but it was closed with no block...So technically this IP range is blocked but it isn't blocked at the same timePatriot1010 (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

86.188.224.210


User:Owen2kuk(User Owen2kuk) had to revert 3 edits from this IP DIFF: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Royston,_Hertfordshire&curid=279710&diff=547614813&oldid=547585335 .Upon checking OverlordQ tools, this IP - this IP is really a spoof. The actual IP range is from 86.0.1.89, and according to ip.robtex.com, is on 5 blacklists for spamming (http://ip.robtex.com/86.0.1.89.html#blacklists ). Also according to OverlordQ tools, the actual IP has many ips behind it. Furthermore, the IP has a pointer to a legitimate website (http://ip.robtex.com/86.0.1.89.html#graph) but it actually goes to ip 86.0.0.0/16, with routes of 86.0.0.0/11, 86.0.0.0/13, 86.0.0.0/14, and appears to currently route to 86.0.0.0/15. Therefore, I recommend a block to 86.0.0.0/15 also, and will reference this record. The web-proxy is coming from the website http://bgp.he.net/ip/86.0.1.89#_rbl, indicated below. I included all the urls and will record this finding on my talk page for record. http://bgp.he.net/ip/86.0.1.89#_rbl Reason: Suspicious edits
 * No, not even close. I'm afraid you're spewing gobbledygook. For further reading: CIDR notation. Sailsbystars (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

178.63.0.0/16


Blocked with no edit or user reference, and Hetzner Online AG is not an open proxy.

Reason: Requested unblock.Patriot1010 (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It took me all of three seconds to find a active tor node in the range. Do you have the rangecontrib checking javascript enabled?  Sailsbystars (talk) 06:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm have a link for that? I just use OverlordQ tools. For example - this range has 2 edits, one from 178.0.0.104 and one from 178.0.1.71....so if this range has been blocked since 2008 - how was IP 178.0.1.71 able to post on 15 MAR 2013? Wow that is unusual. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Music_Never_Stopped&diff=prev&oldid=544496339 . (Sorry for not making a DIFF - things seem to change day by day). Patriot1010 (talk) 03:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Here Ill put the little line noted in the history: 23:35, 15 March 2013‎ 178.0.0.104 (talk)‎ . . (3,863 bytes) (+30)‎ . . (linking the essay to the book it is from)...because you know, that IP range is in rolandr.nl, here is the robtx records, available to the public of course http://dns.robtex.com/rolandr.nl.html#records. It might be related to my sockpuppet investigation.Patriot1010 (talk) 03:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Because neither 178.0.0.104 or 178.0.1.71 is within the range of 178.63.0.0/16. Sailsbystars pointed you to CIDR notation on your last report. You really need to read up on networking before you make any more reports. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)