[Noisebridge-discuss] Should the NB board take action wrt IRC?

[Jeffrey Malone]

I support Noisebridge getting a group registration.

Group registration allows us to hand out host "cloaks" to anyone who
wants more anonymity on IRC.  The cloak changes their connecting
hostname from the host they're using to connect to something like
"freenode/noisebridge" -- it allows people to hide where they're
coming from when they are registered to nickserv.

As for channel privileges, I think the current system of maintaining
ops in the channel is a bad idea.  Inevitably, someone will slip and
op someone they shouldn't -- the last channel takeover happened when
someone joined using Andy's nick and asked for ops.  It also creates a
very visible divide between those with privileges and those without.
My view is also in line with Freenode's suggested policy --
http://freenode.net/channel_guidelines.shtml
Unfortunately, the two channel owners are very rarely on IRC, and both
have expressed dismay with it.  When (not if) the channel gets taken
over again, I believe it would be best for people who are often around
to be able to handle the situation rather than harassing two people
who are busy and seemingly annoyed with the responsibility.

I personally support Jof's suggestion, that we simply get a secure
shell account on a reasonably secure server, run irsii in a screen
session connecting via ssl, and set authorized keys for the account.
This way, no single person is named as an "owner" of the channel.  We
can give access to members who want the responsibility (and not the
novelty), and when problems occur, rely on them to connect and handle
the situation.  This is essentially how our ops team currently works,
as I understand it.

It's been suggested that drama would occur in deciding who hosted this
shell account, and how secure their server would be.  I think we can
find someone we trust (perhaps Jof would be so kind to even offer?).
For additional security, we could have this client with access connect
using a "host cloak" to mask what server is being used, and only give
the host to those with access to login.  By no means foolproof, but if
people wanted to target it, they would have an extra hurdle to find
out what server to even target.

Jeffrey

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Rachel McConnell <rachel at xtreme.com> wrote:
> The board could do this.  Should we?  I won't agree to it unless we have
> a general membership consensus in favor of it; the most difficult bit, I
> think, is to decide who the new channel owners should be.  Let's take
> that in two parts.
>
> IF YOU ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT IRC:
>
> 1. should the board request this from Freenode?
>
> 2. let's wait on *who* until we know if there's consensus on *whether*.
>
> If you don't care about IRC, feel free to suppress this thread entirely.
>
> Rachel
>
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> On 3/26/10 1:19 PM, Ani Niow wrote:
>>> It seems like you know a bit more about the processes with Freenode
>>> than I do, would you have any suggestions beyond what you've said
>>> already to help secure the channel with owners that actually care
>>> about it?
>>
>> Yes.  The NB board should write an official letter to the Freenode
>> board, in which they:
>> a) identify themselves
>> b) identify 3 individuals to be channel owners
>> c) explain the current #noisebridge channel situation and Jake's absence
>> d) request that the #noisebridge channel be assigned to these 3 people
>> and registered as an official channel
>>
>> Given that Freenode is an overworked non-profit, I would also suggest
>> that we make a small donation (like $40 or $50) towards its maintenance
>> since we'll be using *their* time.
>>
>> Also, note that the matter will probably wait until the next Freenode
>> monthly board meeting to resolve.  There's been too many issues over
>> channel hijacking for them to risk rushing a resolution.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>