Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

alec.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 207 posts

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#91

Post by devjungle »

GordonS wrote: post #75
chris_f wrote: post #25

A few corrections: The + (formerly used to force a term to be present in the result) and ~ (also find synonyms) operators have been deprecated. Google now advises to wrap the word in quotes instead of using the +. Google will also automatically look for synonyms without the use of ~. I have seen 'AROUND(n)' mentioned in many other places working as a proximity operator in Google, but I don't believe that is true and…

Worth mentioning that even if you put a term in double quotes, Google still tries to be too clever - you are not guaranteed to get results that contain your quotes search term :/

This must be a recent change? It's been driving me nuts lately. I have to resort to adding a lot of negated search terms to compensate but it's still sub optimal.

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#92

Post by achairapart »

choo-t wrote: post #46
jhbadger wrote: post #42

Does filetype: still work? I'm getting zero hits for example filetype:epub

It still work but some file type never return anything, I have the same problem with epub, pretty sure it's some google's shenanigan about books piracy. https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35287?hl=en

Maybe Google doesn’t index epub at all? I think I never saw one in search results.

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#94

Post by nostromo »

GordonS wrote: post #75
chris_f wrote: post #25

A few corrections: The + (formerly used to force a term to be present in the result) and ~ (also find synonyms) operators have been deprecated. Google now advises to wrap the word in quotes instead of using the +. Google will also automatically look for synonyms without the use of ~. I have seen 'AROUND(n)' mentioned in many other places working as a proximity operator in Google, but I don't believe that is true and…

Worth mentioning that even if you put a term in double quotes, Google still tries to be too clever - you are not guaranteed to get results that contain your quotes search term :/

And even if that exact term is present on popular websites, like Stack Overflow, Google still seems to have trouble finding those exact results regularly.

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#95

Post by userbinator »

yuvadam wrote: post #45

Dorking is not that easy to do, Google is very easy on assuming you are being malicious on certain queries, try one too many and you'll hit their dreaded captcha that is impossible to pass.

That really angers me, and I've tripped it more times than I can count, usually by searching for very specific things. Coworkers have also run into it multiple times (before everyone started working from home, we would exclaim "Fuck you, Google!" and raise a middle finger to the screen, which was a cue to everyone else to help).

The fact that they think you're "not human" when you use a search engine for its intended purpose and show how much you know how to use it is both disturbing and saddening. I wonder if Google's own employees run into it and/or the continuing degradation of results, or if they're somehow given immunity and a much better set of results...

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#96

Post by JasonFruit »

devjungle wrote: post #91
GordonS wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth mentioning that even if you put a term in double quotes, Google still tries to be too clever - you are not guaranteed to get results that contain your quotes search term :/

This must be a recent change? It's been driving me nuts lately. I have to resort to adding a lot of negated search terms to compensate but it's still sub optimal.

It seems to me that after a few negated search terms are included, they are taken less strictly; "minus" seems to mean "probably minus".

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#97

Post by Shared404 »

lsiebert wrote: post #88
Shared404 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wish they supported a larger search syntax. My current workaround is I have a massive bookmark folder of alternative search engines that I try if I'm not having luck narrowing things down enough.

That might make an interesting blog post

I'm still mid-setting up a blog, but I'll keep that in mind once I've got it up and running.

I'm afraid it probably wouldn't be that interesting to HN'ers though, because this is where I found most of them.

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#98

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

lstamour wrote: post #15
voldacar wrote: post #2

Why doesn't google.com have a comprehensive list of these? I'm constantly seeing new ones that I didn't know about, but google never teaches you about them so you have to find them in obscure blog posts

https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en but it's not complete. My favourite is actually the "range" operator. I don't need it often, but when combined with the exact match quotation marks, it's great. For example, here's a search for Sony bluetooth headphones available on Amazon.ca for between CA$100 and $150: https://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=site%3Aamazon.ca+%22C... The range operator also wo…

Is there actually a page that says "too precise to be human" or are you just assuming this is what triggered the reCAPTCHA?

If there is such a page, can you give an example query that would trigger it?

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#99

Post by solarist »

GordonS wrote: post #75
chris_f wrote: post #25

A few corrections: The + (formerly used to force a term to be present in the result) and ~ (also find synonyms) operators have been deprecated. Google now advises to wrap the word in quotes instead of using the +. Google will also automatically look for synonyms without the use of ~. I have seen 'AROUND(n)' mentioned in many other places working as a proximity operator in Google, but I don't believe that is true and…

Worth mentioning that even if you put a term in double quotes, Google still tries to be too clever - you are not guaranteed to get results that contain your quotes search term :/

As a workaround and under search tools one can enable the “verbatim” option.

Re: Dorking: the use of search engines to find very specific data

#100

Post by theodric »

flywheel wrote: post #48
EE84M3i wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "deprecated", you mean as in "discontinued" right? Not just like, discouraged?

Whoever the first developer was that used "deprecated" got it kind of wrong, the word should have been "depreciated". Deprecate: "express disapproval of." Depreciate: "diminish in value over a period of time." I kind of cringe when other developers say "deprecated". Edit: Versioning and not removing APIs is kind of the way to go, so you don't break client apps that possibly can't be updated easily or at all. "Depreci…

You could not be more wrong if you practiced every day https://www.etymonline.com/word/deprecate#etymonline_v_29603
Post reply on HN