| IP address |
user |
talk |
edits |
log |
scan |
block |
Notes
|
| 208.67.36.130
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Whois for this ip address says the host is proxy.xaverian.org Momusufan (talk) 18:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not an open proxy Looks like a school border gateway, only open port was pptp. Q T C 21:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 75.174.69.88
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Someone reported at AIV here that this IP is an open proxy, could someone check it out? Momusufan (talk) 20:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy I didn't see anything Q T C 21:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 75.174.61.152
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Someone at AIV said that this maybe an open proxy, could someone check it out? Momusufan (talk) 20:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Didn't see anything on this one either Q T C 21:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 92.112.148.65
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
One thing I really don't know about is proxies (Still learning the admin ropes), but what I can tell you is that the vandalism contributions of this ip I just blocked was adding websites that help people use proxies. I think this might be worth an investigation. Valley2city‽ 20:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Didn't find anything Q T C 22:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 212.247.11.156
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Unblock request recently came from Semtanahue (talk · contribs) with no problems who wanted the autoblock cleared. Since the vandal-only account from the address suggests something from someone somewhere different, I'd like to know if this is an open proxy. Daniel Case (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Appears to be the head/tail of a VPN. Requires a login. Q T C 10:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 65.246.126.130
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
superclick?
- Not an open proxy, seems to be a corporate gateway proxy (not open). -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 87.194.229.194
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
User:87.194.229.194 (Special:Contributions/87.194.229.194 | Special:Blockip/87.194.229.194) is listed on the sectoor (TOR) list (http://www.sectoor.de/tor.php?ip=87.194.229.194) for the following types of proxies which I checked when they vandalized Pedrinate: . ClueBot (talk) 04:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Bsadowski1 (talk) 08:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 173.3.67.138
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
User:173.3.67.138 (Special:Contributions/173.3.67.138 | Special:Blockip/173.3.67.138) is listed on the sectoor (TOR) list (http://www.sectoor.de/tor.php?ip=173.3.67.138) for the following types of proxies which I checked when they vandalized Madonna: . ClueBot (talk) 03:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy PeterSymonds (talk) 03:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 76.181.67.164
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Used for repeated vandalism on Noam Chomsky. User states that s/he has "access to far too many IP addresses for a ban to be even remotely effective." RolandR (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy PeterSymonds (talk) 03:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 66.30.56.180
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
User:66.30.56.180 (Special:Contributions/66.30.56.180 | Special:Blockip/66.30.56.180) is listed on the sectoor (TOR) list (http://www.sectoor.de/tor.php?ip=66.30.56.180) for the following types of proxies which I checked when they vandalized Magnetite: . ClueBot (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Ports 1723 and 1900 are open but inaccessible. No further open ports. PeterSymonds (talk) 03:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 82.116.234.234
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Behind corporate firewall NMAP results are sometimes unreliable.
- Not an open proxy No open ports. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 83.77.47.229
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Suspected OP.
- Not an open proxy 5190 is open but inaccessible. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 213.91.242.146
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Editing patterns display similarity to indef blocked user Jetwave Dave (talk · contribs). — Jeremy (talk) 23:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy PeterSymonds (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 203.160.1.32/27
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
I blocked this a year and a half ago; don't know if it's still a proxy. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: Report page has been deleted. ClueBot IV (talk) 05:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 75.170.57.79
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Spammer. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Clerk note: Report page has been deleted. ClueBot IV (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Bsadowski1 (talk) 18:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 65.49.14.13
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Another suspected proxy, port 80 is open. Momo san Gespräch 19:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Couldn't get anywhere with it. Q T C 05:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 38.99.170.182
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
A post at this site suggests the IP range could be from an anonymous web proxy server. Shubinator (talk) 19:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Apache on 3333, but isn't open. Q T C 05:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 12.32.210.41
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
This is an IP for the Danbury CT Apple Store's open computers. Seeing that it's open, it should be blocked for being an open proxy so to speak. Whois says the range is 12.32.210.32/28. Momo san Gespräch 17:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- In my opinion it's more of a shared IP than an open proxy. If it vandalizes, I suppose the blocking admin can mull over it then. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 01:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Not an open proxy. Shared IPs are beyond the purview of WP:OP. Q T C 02:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 142.33.172.162
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Over the last year, I've noticed that I warn an inordinate amount of one time anon users for vandalism from IPs belonging to the "Province of British Columbia".this edit suggests that is because they are open proxies. T L Miles (talk) 20:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Inconclusive Only thing open was an Apple VNC port, somebody might test that. Q T C 01:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy. No HTTP proxy and the edit doesn't match an open VNC either. These are usually school IPs btw. -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 82.114.160.37
|
user
|
talk
|
edits
|
log
|
RBL-google-whois
|
block-log |
Open proxy on 80. Momusufan (talk) 20:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an open proxy Seems to be a Access restricted proxy. Q T C 01:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Clerk note: Report page has been deleted. ClueBot IV (talk) 21:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
