4 ms·
I agree that nuking entire domains would be bad for the Internet Archive. But I don't think it would be overwhelmingly difficult, nor controversial, to identify
by kijin 10y ago
I agree that nuking entire domains would be bad for the Internet Archive. But I don't think it would be overwhelmingly difficult, nor controversial, to identify and remove the vast majority of "contaminated" documents. This applies to the Internet Archive as well as major search engines.
First, we're talking about raw memory pages, not merely malformed HTML. Those memory pages might contain valid HTML, but most of the sensitive information is in the headers, not HTML markup. It won't be very difficult to write a script to identify documents where random headers and POST data have been inserted where they don't belong, or where the markup is so obviously invalid (even compared to similar documents from the same site) that there is a high probability of contamination. Having a full list of contaminated domains would obviously help a lot, because we'll only have to deal with thousands of domains instead of millions.
Second, contaminated documents by definition contain information that is NOT what the publisher intended to be crawled, indexed, or archived. So there should be less resistance to removing them.
Finally, most of the contaminated domains used features such as Scrape Shield that were intended to deter archival. It's as if the domain had a robots.txt that said "User-agent:* Disallow:/". I'm not sure whether it's even possible for the Internet Archive to archive such domains. If they can, maybe they've been doing it against the publisher's wishes. If they can't, well, there's no problem to begin with.
- greglindahl 10y agoArchives don't delete stuff, nor do they have much capacity to do much computation on their archived data. Whereas if blekko still existed as a search engine, I'd just push code to refuse to show cached pages or snippets containing text that likely means the CloudFlare problem. 15 minutes work, and the underlying data would expire fully in a couple of months. So I would completely disagree with your speculation about what's easy or hard. (Note that I've worked at a search engine and an archive.)
- singlow 10y agoMy understanding is that scrape shield protects against certain abusive patterns of robot access, but not all URLs on the domain would ban robots. So archive may have many contaminated pages that scrape shield was enabled for but did not ban all robots from crawling based on various criteria.
- d33 10y agoAt the very least that'd cost Internet Archive a lot of human resources. I think it's reasonable to assume that if Cloudflare wants them to fix the problems they themselves created, they should cover their costs of such operation.