Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Admins and patrollers/Allow global whitelisting of IPs subject to global rangeblocks

Random proposal ►◄ Admins and patrollers The survey has concluded. Here are the results!

Allow global whitelisting of IPs subject to global rangeblocks

Problem: Several requests for unblock cannot be handled in due time because of providers/tech depths of different organization mixing up networks which could legitimately edit the wikis with farms with open proxies, spam sources, etc. A quite common case are, also, private proxies on VPS or reverse proxies from different organizations hosted in third-party farms.
Proposed solution: create a Special:GlobalBlockWhitelist page where a global block can be revoked for a certain IP or subnet falling in a blocked range
Who would benefit: dozens of users caught by global blocks
More comments:
Phabricator tickets: phab:T42439
Proposer: Vituzzu (talk) 10:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Why is this an actual issue? --Izno (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the number of duplicates it may be a issue to consider. GZWDer (talk) 10:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The issue? Huge administrative overhead that stewards cannot bear. A quick example: a German free WiFi sharing project is routed through a series of proxies hosted in a bunch of blocked /16, an user asked us to be unblocked, so for each of these blocks I had to replace a single block with 15 blocks. Vituzzu (talk) 16:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vituzzu: so that IP that was unblocked - was it not actually part of a proxy farm, or was the original block just overly aggressive? — xaosflux ^Talk 23:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so in that specific case, but that was just a simple example. I've seen countless private VPS, someone sharing the office with LTAs, etc. Vituzzu (talk) 11:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like a generally useful and interesting challenge -- overlapping passlists + blocklists -- and a practical set of tasks that needs it. –SJ talk 23:09, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If this is implemented, please use "allowlist" or similar for wording per mw:Inclusive language. EpicPupper (talk) 22:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

Support —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stryn (talk) 20:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Make sense. I will say let meta sysops to access it too will be helpful as CAT:RFU on meta is always filled with such requests. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is sometimes also an issue on wikis (like the Dutch Wikipedia) where smaller ranges are inadvertently caught in larger (local) range blocks (unfortunately, locally in our case). A possible extension (once this could be stable... ) could thus be considered. Daniuu (talk) 11:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aca (talk) 12:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Base (talk) 12:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Whitelisting of small IP ranges is a good idea. Thingofme (talk) 13:56, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 18:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Mykola7 (talk) 22:42, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given local whitelists already exist. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good point I forgot mentioning! Vituzzu (talk) 09:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support MdsShakil (talk) 05:37, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 10:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Civvì (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support N013i (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ruthven (msg) 14:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support daSupremo 18:01, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Havang(nl) (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Novak Watchmen (talk) 17:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support MONUMENTA (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alaa :)..! 08:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support SCP-2000 08:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--باسم (talk) 10:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alain Artivalys (talk) 13:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wargo (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support KingAntenor (talk) 05:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support DecrepitlyOnward (talk) 23:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support EN-Jungwon 02:45, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Paucabot (talk) 06:11, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kace7 (talk) 19:35, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tumbuka Arch (talk) 10:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Need it-- MASUM THE GREAT (talk) 11:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Growthsakup (talk) 12:53, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support DaxServer (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sakretsu (炸裂) 12:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Thanks for the fish! ^{talk•contrib} (he/him) 17:26, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ayumu Ozaki (talk) 23:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ciao • Bestoernesto • ✉ 02:27, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vulp❯❯❯here! 02:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brewster239 (T·C·CA) 08:23, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~Cybularny ^Speak? 19:57, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very necessary MF-W 13:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Bilorv (talk) 23:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superpes15 (talk) 23:04, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hroptatyr (talk) 06:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Salihu Aliyu (talk) 09:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nadzik (talk) 13:51, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blablubbs (talk) 14:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geonuch (talk) 15:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]