Silenced users' content can appear on home timeline via boosts

[downeymj]

Steps to reproduce the problem

1. Preconditions: Have account Y status on local instance be Limited, or, account Y is on server Z which has a server-wide Limit in place on your local instance. Follow account A on server B. Ensure you are not following account Y.
2. Account Y on server Z creates a post.
3. Account A on server B boosts the post created in step 2.
4. Post created in step 2 appears on your user's Home timeline as "Boosted by A".

Expected behaviour

Post from step 2 does not appear on Home timeline.

Actual behaviour

Post from step 2 appears in the Home timeline.

Detailed description

TLDR: If your instance has a user (or domain) on Limited status, posts from that user or domain can appear on the Home timeline if boosted by a user that your account follows.

This is contrary to the stated purpose of Limit, namely, "The account will be visible only to those who already follow it or manually look it up, severely limiting its reach." (Stated in admin's UI for processing Reports.)

Mastodon instance

universal

Mastodon version

v.4.1.6

Technical details

N/A - applicable to all latest installations.

[silpol]

also, it would be great to create unit tests to detect in case of future regressions

[Gargron]

Limits do not extend to the home feed. If you follow a limited account, or someone you follow boosts a limited account, you will see it. Likewise, viewing someone's profile will show limited accounts among their boosts. These are "organic" discovery pathways. Limits are not intended to affect them. Limits do affect live feeds, hashtags, explore, and follow recommendations, as well as notifications and follows -- limited accounts will not generate notifications unless you follow them, and must go through a "follow request" even if you accept instant follows otherwise.

[downeymj]

Limits do not extend to the home feed.

If this is the intentional design (which FWIW is actively harmful to user safety) then at the very least, the admin UI explanation mentioned above must be corrected to be honest with admins about this design decision.

[mwt]

Limits do not extend to the home feed. If you follow a limited account, or someone you follow boosts a limited account, you will see it.

This is what I would expect because I think of boosts as reposts. I think this behavior is desirable in many situations.

Maybe there should be a separate "softblock" option where the instance/accounts are effectively blocked unless the user searches their handle directly and follows them. It sounds like this is an option that some in the community are looking for.

[AIndoria]

which FWIW is actively harmful to user safety

I'm not quite sure it is. Isn't it that specific user's active choice in following the x account that is boosting the limited y account's posts?

[nemobis]

Il 24/12/23 02:28, Abe ha scritto:

Isn't it that specific user's active choice in following the x account that is boosting the limited y account's posts?

It's only a choice if the user is aware of it. In the home timeline the indicators of the source of a post are not super obvious, though this varies by client. Seeing boosts of post from limited accounts/instances may warrant an extra indicator, possibly with a warning (the reason provided for the moderation action?).

[silpol]

If you follow a limited account, or someone you follow boosts a limited account, you will see it.

Ahem, at least I'd like to see user's consent when it comes to EU.

Implied design decisions are poor choice as they might lead to interesting interactions with law, and as consequence, fixes made in haste.

[trwnh]

This is contrary to the stated purpose of Limit, namely, "The account will be visible only to those who already follow it or manually look it up, severely limiting its reach." (Stated in admin's UI for processing Reports.)

maybe it would be better to restate this in the UI so that it more precisely describes the actual behavior? something like

Limit this account's reach

This account will be hidden from discovery features and notifications for everyone, unless they follow the account. Incoming follows from this account will be converted to a follow request.

would probably convey the functionality better.

fwiw, i don't think there's any issues with user consent or user safety here -- users already consent to seeing what they follow, and to mess with people's home feeds would violate user expectations.

[downeymj]

users already consent to seeing what they follow

Yes, what the user follows, not what their followers follow.

This (obviously after-the-fact) "design decision" is a clear breach and betrayal of user trust: if the UI says, "account will be visible only to those who already follow it or manually look it up", other users shouldn't be able to circumvent the limitations on these abusive accounts by simply boosting it into someone's timelines against the express decisions of the user and/or admins.

The proposed text is closer, but still misleading through obscurity and jargon, e.g., "discovery features".

This is a bug. The system is not doing what it says it's doing.