61–70 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
to be fair, cache invalidation is hard.
All they need to do is add a new "message" to say "y'know that message number 4029375 in the cache, yeah that ones deleted, ignore it". This is not hard.
What exactly was exposed here. It looks like it's been blocked now... Just stealing from other bit in this thread: somehow these urls got on the Internet even though they shouldn't have. They are pre-authed urls that auto-login and then expire.
Seconding this... I see just ordinary account numbers from here.
Common misinterpretation on how Google handle `Disallow` in robots.txt Q. If I block Google from crawling a page using a robots.txt disallow directive, will it disappear from search results? [1] robots.txt Disallow does not guarantee that a page will not appear in results: Google may still decide, based on external information such as incoming links, that it is relevant. If you wish to explicitly block a page from be…
But don't worry, we'll ignore the information in robots.txt anyway, so maybe it's better to have both information there.
And maybe if it's relevant they'll ignore the X-Robots-Tag as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seconding this... I see just ordinary account numbers from here.
Still exposed here - when you click a link, it pre-fills the login box with a users email. And I guess some of the links include auto-login tokens.
Facebook's privacy settings have a ton of bugs. Here's another one: 1. Make a stupid status update post. 2. It appears in all your friends newsfeed. 3. You realize you said something stupid and private. 4. Panic. Delete post 5. Breathe sigh of relief that it is no longer showing up in your profile. 6. But wait a minute! It still keeps showing up in all your friends newsfeed. 7. Now that you deleted the post, you can'…
Mumble mumble mumble eventual consistency mumble mumble sharded MySQL mumble mumble
Common misinterpretation on how Google handle `Disallow` in robots.txt Q. If I block Google from crawling a page using a robots.txt disallow directive, will it disappear from search results? [1] robots.txt Disallow does not guarantee that a page will not appear in results: Google may still decide, based on external information such as incoming links, that it is relevant. If you wish to explicitly block a page from be…
Google still indexes them. The definition of "relevant" here defies my wildest imagination.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mumble mumble mumble eventual consistency mumble mumble sharded MySQL mumble mumble
This isn't a case of eventual consistency. They don't bother to update the cache(if that is the reason) or update the database used in newsfeed. The deleted posts persist in the newsfeed database many hours(maybe forever) after the delete event.
Here's one theory and analysis of what might have happened. Some people's emails got out into the public internet, and were indexed. Some of these emails were from Facebook, and included links to resources that require login. These links pre-populated the username field for convenience, or in some cases auto-login the user. Facebook's engineers probably did not anticipate email notifications to users being crawled by…
"Some people's emails got out into the public internet, and were indexed. Some of these emails were from Facebook, and included links..." Doesn't Google's toolbar phone home with the URLs you click on? That could be a way to get supposedly-private URLs into Google's list of URLs to be visited.
http://www.seroundtable.com/google-toolbar-indexing-12894.ht...