The consensus was that returning everything is rarely what's desired, for two reasons: first, if the system grows, allowing API users to return everything at once can be a problem both for our server (lots of data in RAM when fetching from the DB => OOM, and additional stress on the DB) and for the user (the same problem on their side). Second, it's easy to forget to specify filters, especially in cases like "let's delete something based on some filters."
So the standard practice now is to return nothing if no filters are provided, and we pay attention to it during code reviews. If the user does really want all the data, you can add pagination to your API. With pagination, it's very unlikely for the user to accidentally fetch everything because they must explicitly work with pagination tokens, etc.
Another option, if you don't want pagination, is to have a separate method named accordingly, like ListAllObjects, without any filters.
From all the recent outages, it sounds like Cloudflare is barely tested at all. Maybe they have lots of unit tests etc, but they do not seem to test their whole system... I get that their whole setup is vast, but even testing that subtask manually would have surfaced the bug
It's alarming already. Too many outages in the past months. CF should fix it, or it becomes unacceptable and people will leave the platform.
I really hope they will figure things out.
Not everybody needs cloudflare, but those that need it and aren't major enterprises, have no other option.
We tried Stackpath, Imperva (Incapsula back in the day), etc but they were either too expensive or went out of business.
the explanation makes no sense:
> Because the client is passing pending_delete with no value, the result of Query().Get(“pending_delete”) here will be an empty string (“”), so the API server interprets this as a request for all BYOIP prefixes instead of just those prefixes that were supposed to be removed. The system interpreted this as all returned prefixes being queued for deletion.
client:
resp, err := d.doRequest(ctx, http.MethodGet, `/v1/prefixes?pending_delete`, nil)
if v := req.URL.Query().Get("pending_delete"); v != "" {
// ignore other behavior and fetch pending objects from the ip_prefixes_deleted table
prefixes, err := c.RO().IPPrefixes().FetchPrefixesPendingDeletion(ctx)
if err != nil {
api.RenderError(ctx, w, ErrInternalError)
return
}
api.Render(ctx, w, http.StatusOK, renderIPPrefixAPIResponse(prefixes, nil))
return
}
If they passed in any value, they would have entered the block and returned early with the results of FetchPrefixesPendingDeletion.
From the post:
> this was implemented as part of a regularly running sub-task that checks for BYOIP prefixes that should be removed, and then removes them.
They expected to drop into the block of code above, but since they didn't, they returned all routes.
actual explanation: the API server by default returns everything. the client attempted to make a request to return "pending_deletes", but as the request was malformed, the API instead went down the default path, which returned everything. then the client deleted everything.
makes sense now
but is that explanation is even worse
because that means the code path was never tested?
Management thinks AI tools should make everyone 10x as productive, so they're all trying to run lean teams and load up the remaining engineers with all the work. This will end about as well as the great offshoring of the early 2000s.
at which point the CVEs started to fly in
I would go so far as to say that you shouldnt be employed in the industry. Malicious actors like you will contribute to an erosion of trust thatll make everything worse
Don’t stop sabotaging AI efforts.
(: phonetically, because 'l's are hard to read.
Even so, it is a strong reminder not to rely on any one vendor for critical stuff, in case that wasn't clear enough yet.
even the blog, that used to be a respected source of technical content, has morphed into a garbage fire of slop and vaporware announcements since jgc left.
If I was a CF customer I would be migrating off now.
**everything breaks**
...
**everything breaks again**
oh fuck! Code Orange! I repeat, Code Orange! we need to rebuild trust(R)(TM)! we've let our customers down!
...
**everything breaks again**
Code Orangier! I repeat, Code Orangier!
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
https://github.com/cloudflare/terraform-provider-cloudflare/...
They definitely failed big this time.
One thing I do appreciate about cloudflare is their actual use of their status page. That’s not to say these outages are okay. They aren’t. However I’m pretty confident in saying that a lot of providers would have a big paper trail of outages if they were more honest to the same degree or more so than cloudflare. At least from what I’ve noticed, especially this year.
But last few months has been quite rough for Cloudflare, and a few outages on their Workers platform that didn't quite make the headlines too. Can't wait for Code Orange to get to production.
As for your last sentence:
Businesses really do care about the incident reports because they give good insight into whether they can trust the company going forward. Full transparency and a clear path to non-repetition due to process or software changes are called for. You be the judge of whether or not you think that standard has been met.
Becuase management wants to know why the graphs all went to zero, and the engineers have nothing else to do but relay the incident report.
This builds a perception for management of the vendor, and if the perception is that the vendor doesnt tell them shit or doesnt even seem to know theres an outage, then management can decide to shift vendors
Lmao, iirc long time ago Google's internal system had the same exact bug (treating empty as "all" in the delete call) that took down all their edges. Surprisingly there was little impact as traffic just routed through the next set of proxies.