6 ms·

At this point, every developer should (and needs) to be aware of how invasive any tracking code they blindly copy/paste into a website. I think it's required fr

At this point, every developer should (and needs) to be aware of how invasive any tracking code they blindly copy/paste into a website. I think it's required from people who operate normal websites, blogs, etc... but missing it is somewhat forgivable, especially from people just starting. But the level of irresponsibility with customers' most private data from a company who's MAIN JOB is to protect it is absolutely shocking. Yes, it's the freaking pixel that does the tracking, BUT IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW WHAT THE HECK IS HAPPENING ON THEIR WEBSITE. Don't they have any sort of vulnerability assessment or security code review? Their reply tweet is almost as infuriating as how something like that could even happen to begin with. Like yeah, sorry, ain't our fault! It's astounding. I considered using backblaze a couple of times and now I'm very happy that I eventually didn't.

vesinisa 6y ago
> Don't they have any sort of vulnerability assessment or security code review? I bet people just don't realize that the frontend code could end up being a source of major data confidentiality vulnerability. The threat modeling, auditing etc. usually just concentrates on attack scenarios involving the backend to save money and keep frontend development a bit lighter on the security review process side. Does not make it excusable of course, just means their threat modeling was inadequate. But probably explains how this was able to sip into production.
- Aeolun 6y ago
  I dunno, you don’t need to be particularly concerned with security to understand that you do not need a facebook tracking pixel on your ‘paying customer’ UI.
  - jeffasinger 6y ago
    Facebook will be pitching to your Marketing folks that's exactly where you need it. Facebook want data on what actions users took before signing up, which users actually signed up and started paying, and how that relates to revenue. This UI is exactly where they can determine these types of actions. Whether this actually makes Facebook better at marketing or not is a good question.
    - beshrkayali 6y ago
      That's why it's a killer mistake to let "marketing folk" dictate _anything_ that has to do with the app. They can suggest, but not dictate. If this points to anything it'd the dysfunctional development process at Backblaze.
      - coldtea 6y ago
        >That's why it's a killer mistake to let "marketing folk" dictate _anything_ that has to do with the app. Killer mistake of your revenue, or killer mistake of what we'd prefer apps to be?
        dnzm 6y ago
        In this case it's certainly going to cost them some revenue, not to mention the EU might slap them with a nice GDPR fine for leaking PII.
csnover 6y ago
> Don't they have any sort of vulnerability assessment or security code review? I haven’t seen any evidence that they do. The last time I brought up their history of bad security practices on HN, one of their co-founders decided that the correct course of action was to come on here, accuse me of being a bad actor, and repeatedly make up quotes I didn’t say.[0] All because I tried to warn others in the community that something just like this was likely to happen again. And now it has. So, you know. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25919105 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25919105
- tidepod12 6y ago
  Wow. After reading about the FB tracking I was wary about Backblaze but teetering on the edge of willing to give it a pass if they fixed it. But after reading brianwski's comments in that thread, the arrogance and unprofessionalism (especially in his last comment) just completely turned me off. That attitude goes beyond a technical fuckup or bad marketing move. I'm moving my backups out of Backblaze today and won't be looking back.
  - metalliqaz 6y ago
    not to me. sounds like someone who is tired of dealing with a user that has an axe to grind for years
    - csnover 6y ago
      OK, except I’m not a Backblaze user and I never have been (except for the 14-day free trial). I haven’t had any private correspondence with them since reporting the vulnerability I discovered in 2019. This exchange on HN was the first time I’ve ever knowingly[0] interacted with this guy. If he has actually been ‘dealing with [me] for years’ in the way you imply, it has been a very one-sided relationship. As far as having an axe to grind goes… if wanting to protect others is grinding an axe, I guess I’m guilty of that. I don’t feel like a handful of topical messages warning people of a legitimate and clearly ongoing problem is some abusive behaviour on my part, but maybe I’m wrong. I’m happy to learn from others’ perspectives, since I’m sure I could be a more effective communicator. [0] I suspect he was the one who replied to my vulnerability report since the same attitude was on display in those messages too, but I don’t know since that account was just named “bbqa”.
hertzrat 6y ago
> I considered using backblaze a couple of times and now I'm very happy that I eventually didn't. Same. I ended up going with spideroak because it was too hard to figure out what other providers were even promising for privacy, and it’s been fine. I’m thinking maybe of trying rsync.net with duplicity one day

vesinisa 6y ago

> Don't they have any sort of vulnerability assessment or security code review? I bet people just don't realize that the frontend code could end up being a source of major data confidentiality vulnerability. The threat modeling, auditing etc. usually just concentrates on attack scenarios involving the backend to save money and keep frontend development a bit lighter on the security review process side. Does not make it excusable of course, just means their threat modeling was inadequate. But probably explains how this was able to sip into production.

Aeolun 6y ago
I dunno, you don’t need to be particularly concerned with security to understand that you do not need a facebook tracking pixel on your ‘paying customer’ UI.
- jeffasinger 6y ago
  Facebook will be pitching to your Marketing folks that's exactly where you need it. Facebook want data on what actions users took before signing up, which users actually signed up and started paying, and how that relates to revenue. This UI is exactly where they can determine these types of actions. Whether this actually makes Facebook better at marketing or not is a good question.
  - beshrkayali 6y ago
    That's why it's a killer mistake to let "marketing folk" dictate _anything_ that has to do with the app. They can suggest, but not dictate. If this points to anything it'd the dysfunctional development process at Backblaze.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      >That's why it's a killer mistake to let "marketing folk" dictate _anything_ that has to do with the app. Killer mistake of your revenue, or killer mistake of what we'd prefer apps to be?
      - dnzm 6y ago
        In this case it's certainly going to cost them some revenue, not to mention the EU might slap them with a nice GDPR fine for leaking PII.

csnover 6y ago

> Don't they have any sort of vulnerability assessment or security code review? I haven’t seen any evidence that they do. The last time I brought up their history of bad security practices on HN, one of their co-founders decided that the correct course of action was to come on here, accuse me of being a bad actor, and repeatedly make up quotes I didn’t say.[0] All because I tried to warn others in the community that something just like this was likely to happen again. And now it has. So, you know. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25919105 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25919105

tidepod12 6y ago
Wow. After reading about the FB tracking I was wary about Backblaze but teetering on the edge of willing to give it a pass if they fixed it. But after reading brianwski's comments in that thread, the arrogance and unprofessionalism (especially in his last comment) just completely turned me off. That attitude goes beyond a technical fuckup or bad marketing move. I'm moving my backups out of Backblaze today and won't be looking back.
- metalliqaz 6y ago
  not to me. sounds like someone who is tired of dealing with a user that has an axe to grind for years
  - csnover 6y ago
    OK, except I’m not a Backblaze user and I never have been (except for the 14-day free trial). I haven’t had any private correspondence with them since reporting the vulnerability I discovered in 2019. This exchange on HN was the first time I’ve ever knowingly[0] interacted with this guy. If he has actually been ‘dealing with [me] for years’ in the way you imply, it has been a very one-sided relationship. As far as having an axe to grind goes… if wanting to protect others is grinding an axe, I guess I’m guilty of that. I don’t feel like a handful of topical messages warning people of a legitimate and clearly ongoing problem is some abusive behaviour on my part, but maybe I’m wrong. I’m happy to learn from others’ perspectives, since I’m sure I could be a more effective communicator. [0] I suspect he was the one who replied to my vulnerability report since the same attitude was on display in those messages too, but I don’t know since that account was just named “bbqa”.

hertzrat 6y ago

> I considered using backblaze a couple of times and now I'm very happy that I eventually didn't. Same. I ended up going with spideroak because it was too hard to figure out what other providers were even promising for privacy, and it’s been fine. I’m thinking maybe of trying rsync.net with duplicity one day