Are anonymity-seekers just like everybody else? An analysis of contributions to Wikipedia from Tor

April 08, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Chau Tran, Kaylea Champion, Andrea Forte, Benjamin Mako Hill, Rachel Greenstadt arXiv ID 1904.04324 Category cs.SI: Social & Info Networks Cross-listed cs.CY, cs.HC Citations 14 Venue IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
User-generated content sites routinely block contributions from users of privacy-enhancing proxies like Tor because of a perception that proxies are a source of vandalism, spam, and abuse. Although these blocks might be effective, collateral damage in the form of unrealized valuable contributions from anonymity seekers is invisible. One of the largest and most important user-generated content sites, Wikipedia, has attempted to block contributions from Tor users since as early as 2005. We demonstrate that these blocks have been imperfect and that thousands of attempts to edit on Wikipedia through Tor have been successful. We draw upon several data sources and analytical techniques to measure and describe the history of Tor editing on Wikipedia over time and to compare contributions from Tor users to those from other groups of Wikipedia users. Our analysis suggests that although Tor users who slip through Wikipedia's ban contribute content that is more likely to be reverted and to revert others, their contributions are otherwise similar in quality to those from other unregistered participants and to the initial contributions of registered users.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Social & Info Networks

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted