Wikipedia has been hit by a data breach

https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... f=5&t=3520

Ksvo wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 8:05 am

Next day delivery, nice.

Given the sort of stuff that gets oversighted, that looks like a good way to get sued. And not by the WMF. By people/corporations etc who you've just recklessly published libel on. Or maybe find yourself having to explain why you are endangering minors to law enforcement.

Assuming it isn't complete bullshit, which it most likely is.

Yeah if this is real there's going to be a bunch of libel and CSE in there. The attack-page a weird stalker (guy who I played a small role in exposing as a fake lawyer in my China days and who has stalked me ever since) created about me, under my real name, which got speedied is going to be in there.

Better if it's just BS.

AFAIK oversighter is a special permission and not just something that just any admin has, so if it's been hacked that's a major failure. I'm not a cyber-security guy but I would assume they would have applied the kind of stuff they use to protect databases of passwords to the oversighted edits database? Like, salting the data, that kind of thing? Most likely avenue (if it genuinely has been hacked) would therefore be stolen credentials?

Sucks hosting this is a major fail on their part too.

Giraffe Stapler wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:13 pm

If it is legit, I would have expected some sort of activity on Wikipedia about this, or from the WMF. Surely they would have records showing if a large amount of sensitive data was exfiltrated? Or maybe not.

Randy from Boise wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 3:11 pm

Giraffe Stapler wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:13 pm

Surprisingly, it seems legit.

Dunno, the links on the big table of oversighted content by month were all empty for me.

t

The ones I looked at (March 2021) had content, but not the oversighted/revdel'd content I was aware of from that month (Lugnuts's fake suicidal posting that he pulled to try to derail an AN discussion about him that was headed towards imposing sanctions - it's beyond me that he wasn't indef'd for that BS).

Most of the revdel'd content appeared to be hidden IP numbers, email addresses and so-forth, so yeah, that's not great. Some of it clearly wasn't from EN WP either, but instead from Wikimedia, which suggests possibly this was a database-level breach and not stolen credentials (if, again, this is a legit leak).

It's possible that ARBCOM's internal wiki is in this data somewhere....

FOARP wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 3:27 pm

Randy from Boise wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 3:11 pm

Giraffe Stapler wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:13 pm

Surprisingly, it seems legit.

Dunno, the links on the big table of oversighted content by month were all empty for me.

t

The ones I looked at (March 2021) had content, but not the oversighted/revdel'd content I was aware of from that month (Lugnuts's fake suicidal posting that he pulled to try to derail an AN discussion about him that was headed towards imposing sanctions - it's beyond me that he wasn't indef'd for that BS).

Most of the revdel'd content appeared to be hidden IP numbers, email addresses and so-forth, so yeah, that's not great. Some of it clearly wasn't from EN WP either, but instead from Wikimedia, which suggests possibly this was a database-level breach and not stolen credentials (if, again, this is a legit leak).

It's possible that ARBCOM's internal wiki is in this data somewhere....

Guess you missed the original post? It says what's being published is "demo" for meta. Next will be en.wp, and then the rest possibly over weeks.

Carcharoth wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:45 pm

With their usual alacrity and future proofing?

Carcharoth wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:45 pm

Cat in the box wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 4:32 pm

They will do what they always do. As little as possible, and that too late.

C&B wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 16, 2025 7:05 pm

Yeah the front page is there, but if I try to search I get a 404 error

I'm getting them. I clicked the link that says "deleted pages" and I get an index and click on the (supposedly) deleted content. I went to revdel and oversighted but got links but the ones I saw were all blank.

Meh, Richard Arthur Norton syndrome.

Sourcing and cut-and-paste standards changed over time, leaving early Wikipedians who were free-and-easy with their adherence to copyright with huge icebergs of potential problems with the editing of their first years.

Then CCI — whose methodology totally does not scale for massive contributors — tells the editor to effectively cut down the tallest tree in the forest with a herring, terminating current activity until they revisit everything they ever did 15 or 20 years ago, edit by edit. Most of these edits have subsequently been changed or deleted by others, mind you.

The quality of one's current work doesn't matter a whit to CCI. They want the ancient bad editing fixed. One is "morally required" to clean up the "mess"...

The only possible response of a sane person is "fuck that shit, I'm outta here."

t

I wish Sucks would close up shop, and have a beer with the current management, and come to WPO with spiffy new names. Except for Eric, who is the OG of Wikipedia critics. He is Eric. Not pleased to meet you.

We need the vinegar.

t

Which was why straight deleting all Lugnuts unimproved single-source stubs was always the better path. Just cut the damn knot already.

Bbb23sucks had been involved in automated email-spam campaigns before.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13309

On a personal capacity I do not officially endorse the leak(s) at all due to the obvious illegality and because of the possibility that it will inadvertently backfire by lot, especially by jeopardizing an endgame plan I've privately disclose to Midsize Jake through PMs the other day.

Carcharoth wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 20, 2025 4:58 pm

The possibilities cannot be ruled out at this moment. Now that's its confirmed the biggest question is, why isn't this being discussed on the Village Pump yet?

Please refer me as Ron Merkle (Justapedian) if you're discussing this at the Village Pump.