Full Version: meta is hacked!
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page go here and hit "main page" or anything else.
Looks like it fixed. the post should be removed.
It was hacked for a few minutes. No matter what one is to hit, it took him to anti-Semitic site.
It was hacked for a few minutes. No matter what one is to hit, it took him to anti-Semitic site.
It was just some vandalism.
It is doing this again. http://jewsdidwtc.amirite.biz/proof.php?evidence=4000 here's the garbage it takes one too.
Template vandalism again?
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Mon 20th February 2012, 12:55pm) 
Template vandalism again?
Of course. It's one of those fast, stupid things one can do to a website that is constantly being watched by 20-50 paranoid, autistic manchildren who never sleep. You can bet the meta IRC channel is on fire, as they frantically try to figure out which sysop account was hacked.
(And as usual, they will block the IP address and walk away, congratulating each other, without saving any of the log files. Because who cares about analyzing the way the attack was performed? We "nailed the evil one". It is one of my ongoing beefs with the people who run Wikimedia assets, they are shallow and reactionary. Such vandalism will happen again, because they will not devise a permanent method to prevent it.)
QUOTE
Propose full protection for main page
I would like to propose that we up the protection for the main page from edit=autoconfirmed to edit=sysop. For a lead entry page, it really should be better protected, and while the COIBot should not be editing here, and we will look to the fix, it may just be safer to tighten the control anyway. billinghurst sDrewth 15:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Totally agree. -Barras 15:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I would like to propose that we up the protection for the main page from edit=autoconfirmed to edit=sysop. For a lead entry page, it really should be better protected, and while the COIBot should not be editing here, and we will look to the fix, it may just be safer to tighten the control anyway. billinghurst sDrewth 15:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Totally agree. -Barras 15:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Too late, assholes.
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 20th February 2012, 9:30pm)
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Mon 20th February 2012, 12:55pm)
Template vandalism again?
Of course. It's one of those fast, stupid things one can do to a website that is constantly being watched by 20-50 paranoid, autistic manchildren who never sleep. You can bet the meta IRC channel is on fire, as they frantically try to figure out which sysop account was hacked.
(And as usual, they will block the IP address and walk away, congratulating each other, without saving any of the log files. Because who cares about analyzing the way the attack was performed? We "nailed the evil one". It is one of my ongoing beefs with the people who run Wikimedia assets, they are shallow and reactionary. Such vandalism will happen again, because they will not devise a permanent method to prevent it.)
Could something like this be done to English wiki?Has it ever been done there?
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Mon 20th February 2012, 10:33pm)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 20th February 2012, 9:30pm)
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Mon 20th February 2012, 12:55pm)
Template vandalism again?
Of course. It's one of those fast, stupid things one can do to a website that is constantly being watched by 20-50 paranoid, autistic manchildren who never sleep. You can bet the meta IRC channel is on fire, as they frantically try to figure out which sysop account was hacked.
(And as usual, they will block the IP address and walk away, congratulating each other, without saving any of the log files. Because who cares about analyzing the way the attack was performed? We "nailed the evil one". It is one of my ongoing beefs with the people who run Wikimedia assets, they are shallow and reactionary. Such vandalism will happen again, because they will not devise a permanent method to prevent it.)
Could something like this be done to English wiki?Has it ever was done there?
Yes on both counts. Template vandalism goes back years, maybe even over a decade. Regarding this particular incident, here's a "press release" of the people responsible.
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Mon 20th February 2012, 1:33pm)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 20th February 2012, 9:30pm)
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Mon 20th February 2012, 12:55pm)
Template vandalism again?
Of course. It's one of those fast, stupid things one can do to a website that is constantly being watched by 20-50 paranoid, autistic manchildren who never sleep. You can bet the meta IRC channel is on fire, as they frantically try to figure out which sysop account was hacked.
(And as usual, they will block the IP address and walk away, congratulating each other, without saving any of the log files. Because who cares about analyzing the way the attack was performed? We "nailed the evil one". It is one of my ongoing beefs with the people who run Wikimedia assets, they are shallow and reactionary. Such vandalism will happen again, because they will not devise a permanent method to prevent it.)
Could something like this be done to English wiki?Has it ever been done there?
Yes, and yes. Recently.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.