Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This isn't "tricky dick shenanigians", it's an oversight of one team working on one small part of the entire Facebook infrastructure. It is cool to hate Facebook on HN now, because they make a lot of money and the audience here is predominately trying to bootstrap a startup but that doesn't change the fact that one of the most popular and largest sites on the Internet has an issue which was developed most likely by a few engineers.

These amateur hour type comments which seem to always follow Facebook posts anymore seem to say more about the fact that more and more HN commenters have no experience working in an enterprise environment and believe their 10 instance AWS based startup they are currently involved with somehow is comparable to the Facebook ecosystem.



Who's hating on Facebook because they have money? I'm hating on Facebook because they can't secure a CRUD app, and don't really seem to care much either. This isn't the first occurrence of a permissions snafu, which tells me they should invest some more of their bundles into QA and testing. But then again, click-bots probably offer a better ROI.


They do care, note the top post of this story now is from a FB employee stating they've fixed the error 7 hours after it was published.

Also Facebook is slightly more complex than a CRUD app.


Damage control != caring. Caring would be fixing their systems after the first few privacy fuck-ups. Why are you so determined to paint FB in the best of light?

Honest question. How many more breaches have to occur before you consider FB reckless? Or is your allegiance unconditional?


I'm not defending Facebook I just have actual experience working in real world enterprise size companies. My previous gig was as an engineer for one of the largest websites on the Internet. It employes thousands of engineers and software developers working on hundreds of different small teams who all release early and release often.

There isn't some magic wand that Zuck can somehow wave to prevent software bugs from occurring. That's how things actually work in the real world.


You're evading the question. How many more privacy breaches have to occur before you consider FB reckless? I'm not talking about security breaches, I'm talking about code being pushed that breaks expected privacy functionality.

This is especially pathetic considering they're "enterprise". You would think they engineered some kind of security test to check for these things. Why it's not in the build-process points to negligence in my eyes.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: