Talk:Access control approval guidelines/Proposed revision June 2014

Board wiki

My understanding, from when I was a trustee, was that the Board wiki was restricted to trustees and would never be accessed by employees.

I made a confidential declaration to my fellow trustees on that wiki, along with other matters, that I do not give permission to be released to any employee or contractor. I would consider specifically releasing pages, or having them deleted on a case by case basis.

If this is an intentional change by the current board of trustees, then all past trustees and directors who contributed to the board wiki should be informed and invited to comment before any change to the privacy of this information is made. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2014 (BST)

Can you point to where this change is in the document, please. The only mention of the board wiki I can spot is in the list of what access will be granted to trustees: "Generally, for new trustees the following access will be granted as standard: [...] Office and Board Wiki.".

For added clarity it might be worth splitting the "Trustees and volunteers" section into separate ones, but this change would not (as I read it) result in any material changes. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 10:57, 14 May 2014 (BST)

It has been resolved. It was a copy and pasting error. That particular portion of text related to trustees rather than staff as denoted by the header immediately above. Thank you to Fae for pointing out this discrepancy, and to Michael for fixing it. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:08, 14 May 2014 (BST)

Argh! Sorry about that :( - good spot, keep 'em coming! Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 11:51, 14 May 2014 (BST)

Splitting Trustees and Volunteers out as sections

Just responding on that point. I am semi confident these policies will need further revisions later this year and we might look at a more explicit process for allowing volunteers to access data or services as a part of that but for now the default option is as described. I would need Katie to do some work to support a changed policy and we would want the community to guide what the process should look like i.e. if we have volunteer agreements or some other way of protecting personal info but letting volunteers access, for instance, Civi CRM or survey monkey, which they currently don't. Feel free to discuss this point now of course, but the bottom line is we need time to consult and develop a process that is good for volunteers and legally compliant and until that's in place the default position is sort of this? A helpful comment would be to know if volunteers have ideas about how they might use or need to access data to get more out of their work? :-) Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2014 (BST)

Off the top of my head, if the suggestion to get Eduroam access happens then my understanding is that to benefit from this volunteers would need a @wikimedia.org.uk email address attached to an account that the local server validated. It wouldn't need to be any more than an inbox (I think) but that might require some change of something. The benefit to volunteers would be logins to university, etc networks while doing training events. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 14:35, 14 May 2014 (BST)

Sounds good - actually think that that doesn't come under this as those emails wouldn't give access to any personal data (?) I suppose it could come under an 'acceptable use' style consideration - it may be I'm missing something though. Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 14:56, 14 May 2014 (BST)

I think Eduroam for volunteers has been discussed for about 2 years now. It might be smart for the Tech committee to write down a spec for it, and get feedback from other chapters in Europe who may be interested in joining the scheme at the same time. Eduroam is incredibly handy when visiting University locations in many countries (wandering around Oxford or Cambridge, gets you access in the most surprising locations due to the number of university related institutions around the town). I see nothing wrong in a specific sub-domain for access accounts, if necessary with a usage agreement for the related email account. I think unlawful use, such as downloading copyright material from peer sharing apps, is covered by Eduroam's own usage policy. --Fæ (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2014 (BST)