New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

facebook: can't distinguish some photos as public vs private #611

Closed
tinokremer opened this Issue Jan 24, 2016 · 18 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@tinokremer

tinokremer commented Jan 24, 2016

I added a photo post on my site (Known, self hosted) this morning which syndicated to Facebook, Twitter and Flickr (and manually to Google+). I noticed there are no comments appearing from Facebook so I decided to dive into it.

The post: https://tinokremer.nl/2016/hiep-hiep-hoera
The FB syndicated post: https://facebook.com/504157529757046

Both are fully public and the photo post does have the "Original" link in there which works correctly.

I'm wondering what is causing it to not appear. I can think of these reasons:

  1. The post has not been discovered for some reason, I notice my photo appears in my wife's timeline as "Tino Kremer has posted 2 photos), could that be the reason?

  2. There are 2 fails on the FB Bridgy page:

image

That failure is probably another bug which could be Known and not Bridgy. The link is https://tinokremer.nl/10102571892817971/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het which does not appear to be working. Perhaps it did work before as I did receive quite a few comments on that post as well, original here: https://tinokremer.nl/2016/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het

  1. Something else?

I don't think I can see access what Bridgy sees on my FB profile, but I'm wondering what is causing it and if I can do something to fix it.

@kylewm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kylewm

kylewm Jan 24, 2016

Collaborator

https://tinokremer.nl/10102571892817971/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het

Ah darn, this is actually an unintended consequence of my changes to Known's permalink routing. It is now expecting a 4 digit year, whereas it used to accept any number. So when facebook changes 2016 to 10102571892817971, it doesn't work anymore.

Blech I didn't realize Facebook was rewriting links in the body of the post now. That suuucks.

Collaborator

kylewm commented Jan 24, 2016

https://tinokremer.nl/10102571892817971/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het

Ah darn, this is actually an unintended consequence of my changes to Known's permalink routing. It is now expecting a 4 digit year, whereas it used to accept any number. So when facebook changes 2016 to 10102571892817971, it doesn't work anymore.

Blech I didn't realize Facebook was rewriting links in the body of the post now. That suuucks.

@kylewm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kylewm

kylewm Jan 24, 2016

Collaborator

Blech I didn't realize Facebook was rewriting links in the body of the post now. That suuucks.

Update: ok fortunately it isn't that. The post that's failing has a "See Original" link, rather than a link in the body, and that is what Facebook is rewriting. (Which is well known)

Collaborator

kylewm commented Jan 24, 2016

Blech I didn't realize Facebook was rewriting links in the body of the post now. That suuucks.

Update: ok fortunately it isn't that. The post that's failing has a "See Original" link, rather than a link in the body, and that is what Facebook is rewriting. (Which is well known)

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Jan 24, 2016

Is that the case? In this post it looks like it's just text "Original: link": "Original: https://tinokremer.nl/2016/hiep-hiep-hoera". I'm talking about the not discovered post https://facebook.com/504157529757046

tinokremer commented Jan 24, 2016

Is that the case? In this post it looks like it's just text "Original: link": "Original: https://tinokremer.nl/2016/hiep-hiep-hoera". I'm talking about the not discovered post https://facebook.com/504157529757046

@kylewm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kylewm

kylewm Jan 24, 2016

Collaborator

You're right, the photo post seems like it should have been discovered. I wouldn't guess that has anything to do with the webmentions to https://tinokremer.nl/10102571892817971/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het that are failing... Webmentions in the queue are more or less independent.

Collaborator

kylewm commented Jan 24, 2016

You're right, the photo post seems like it should have been discovered. I wouldn't guess that has anything to do with the webmentions to https://tinokremer.nl/10102571892817971/conversatie-tussen-mijn-zoon-en-dochter-4zoon-ik-vind-het that are failing... Webmentions in the queue are more or less independent.

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

oh boy, fun!

for more background, the facebook bug that rewrites years in URLs to longer ids is #368.

@kylewm is right about the rest; we can look into it. looks like your bridgy user page is https://brid.gy/facebook/403320719840728 .

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

oh boy, fun!

for more background, the facebook bug that rewrites years in URLs to longer ids is #368.

@kylewm is right about the rest; we can look into it. looks like your bridgy user page is https://brid.gy/facebook/403320719840728 .

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

looks like this line in the log is the problem:

2016-01-24 16:04:28.001640 I Skipping non-public activity tag:facebook.com,2013:504157529757046

evidently we don't think https://facebook.com/504157529757046 is public, even though it is. not sure why; i'll investigate.

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

looks like this line in the log is the problem:

2016-01-24 16:04:28.001640 I Skipping non-public activity tag:facebook.com,2013:504157529757046

evidently we don't think https://facebook.com/504157529757046 is public, even though it is. not sure why; i'll investigate.

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

whee. so figuring out an FB post or photo's privacy setting is surprisingly hard, and can take multiple conditional API calls. background in #559 (comment) .

in this case, it looks like we followed the bread crumb trail correctly, from photo (object) id 504157529757046 back to consolidated "uploaded 2 photos" post id 403320719840728_504157529757046, which has privacy CUSTOM with no extra details:

"privacy": {
  "value": "CUSTOM",
  "description": "",
  "friends": "",
  "allow": "",
  "deny": ""
},

privacy field docs here...but they don't say anything about what CUSTOM with no details means. currently we're conservative and only interpret EVERYONE as public.

@tinokremer, does that photo or the album have anything more than just "Public" selected in privacy settings? maybe under "More Options"?

(ah facebook. never change!)

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

whee. so figuring out an FB post or photo's privacy setting is surprisingly hard, and can take multiple conditional API calls. background in #559 (comment) .

in this case, it looks like we followed the bread crumb trail correctly, from photo (object) id 504157529757046 back to consolidated "uploaded 2 photos" post id 403320719840728_504157529757046, which has privacy CUSTOM with no extra details:

"privacy": {
  "value": "CUSTOM",
  "description": "",
  "friends": "",
  "allow": "",
  "deny": ""
},

privacy field docs here...but they don't say anything about what CUSTOM with no details means. currently we're conservative and only interpret EVERYONE as public.

@tinokremer, does that photo or the album have anything more than just "Public" selected in privacy settings? maybe under "More Options"?

(ah facebook. never change!)

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Jan 24, 2016

You're correct @snarfed. The 'album' (which is virtual, I haven't created a single album on Facebook myself) has it's setting to "Custom", meaning every photo will have its own privacy setting:

image

This is quite normal. I have several automatically created albums (I never create one myself) and all have that setting. I don't think I can change it either. This is what the 'album' page on Facebook says:

image

I'm actually annoyed Facebook does create albums and decides to show several completely unrelated photos as a group. That's what we have to deal with, it's a common issue with Silo's, they tend to do things a certain way and you, as a user, have no way to alter that.

I'm not an expert on the Facebook API (in fact, I know it exists, but haven't actually looked at it closely). It seems like "Custom" means the privacy setting of the individual photo's should be used instead.

I learned something as well, I should not post pictures when something like this is popping up within the next 24 hours. This is a 'card' letting my friends and family know it's both my kids birthday today. One of the most interesting ones to save comments from.

tinokremer commented Jan 24, 2016

You're correct @snarfed. The 'album' (which is virtual, I haven't created a single album on Facebook myself) has it's setting to "Custom", meaning every photo will have its own privacy setting:

image

This is quite normal. I have several automatically created albums (I never create one myself) and all have that setting. I don't think I can change it either. This is what the 'album' page on Facebook says:

image

I'm actually annoyed Facebook does create albums and decides to show several completely unrelated photos as a group. That's what we have to deal with, it's a common issue with Silo's, they tend to do things a certain way and you, as a user, have no way to alter that.

I'm not an expert on the Facebook API (in fact, I know it exists, but haven't actually looked at it closely). It seems like "Custom" means the privacy setting of the individual photo's should be used instead.

I learned something as well, I should not post pictures when something like this is popping up within the next 24 hours. This is a 'card' letting my friends and family know it's both my kids birthday today. One of the most interesting ones to save comments from.

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

thanks for the details @tinokremer! sadly the photo object has no privacy field, and the post connected to it by object_id has the blank CUSTOM privacy field i posted above, so we fall back to the album.

we've seen this before, e.g. #559 (comment). we originally defaulted to interpreting these cases as public, and we ended up backfeeding non-public responses. that's definitely not acceptable, so we had to stop that. sadly it's looking like the tradeoff may be that we lose some public posts like this one, since there's no way to distinguish that they're public. i'd love to find a way though!

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

thanks for the details @tinokremer! sadly the photo object has no privacy field, and the post connected to it by object_id has the blank CUSTOM privacy field i posted above, so we fall back to the album.

we've seen this before, e.g. #559 (comment). we originally defaulted to interpreting these cases as public, and we ended up backfeeding non-public responses. that's definitely not acceptable, so we had to stop that. sadly it's looking like the tradeoff may be that we lose some public posts like this one, since there's no way to distinguish that they're public. i'd love to find a way though!

@snarfed snarfed changed the title from Do Facebook webmention "Failures" hold up the queue? to facebook: can't distinguish some photos as public vs private Jan 24, 2016

@snarfed snarfed added the listen label Jan 24, 2016

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

and you're definitely right that facebook consolidating photo posts is annoying! we've had to do a lot of work to handle that so far, for both backfeed (#562) and publish (#571).

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

and you're definitely right that facebook consolidating photo posts is annoying! we've had to do a lot of work to handle that so far, for both backfeed (#562) and publish (#571).

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Jan 24, 2016

Can we get Bridgy to process the comments manually in this particular case? Or should I just leave it like it is for now or write something to import it manually myself? :)

tinokremer commented Jan 24, 2016

Can we get Bridgy to process the comments manually in this particular case? Or should I just leave it like it is for now or write something to import it manually myself? :)

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jan 24, 2016

Owner

@tinokremer sure! you can send webmentions for each comment and like manually, using https://brid.gy/about#source-urls to generate the bridgy source URLs.

that is a lot of tedious work though. #579 is probably what you're looking for, triggering backfeed for an entire post, but that's not supported yet, especially not for private posts. that check is very strict right now.

sorry. feel free to subscribe to #579 so you'll know if we do eventually do it!

Owner

snarfed commented Jan 24, 2016

@tinokremer sure! you can send webmentions for each comment and like manually, using https://brid.gy/about#source-urls to generate the bridgy source URLs.

that is a lot of tedious work though. #579 is probably what you're looking for, triggering backfeed for an entire post, but that's not supported yet, especially not for private posts. that check is very strict right now.

sorry. feel free to subscribe to #579 so you'll know if we do eventually do it!

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Jan 24, 2016

Done and massive thanks for the support @kylewm and @snarfed !

tinokremer commented Jan 24, 2016

Done and massive thanks for the support @kylewm and @snarfed !

snarfed added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 25, 2016

update docs for #611 (can't distinguish private vs public for some fa…
…cebook photos)

also remove some outdated FAQs
@kylewm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kylewm

kylewm Jan 26, 2016

Collaborator

FWIW, I believe "Custom" can also mean some complicated union of "These groups and not these groups". For a long time I had my default setting to share with "Custom: Friends minus people from high school I don't really like".

Collaborator

kylewm commented Jan 26, 2016

FWIW, I believe "Custom" can also mean some complicated union of "These groups and not these groups". For a long time I had my default setting to share with "Custom: Friends minus people from high school I don't really like".

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Jan 26, 2016

You could be very right @kylewm. I think more people use it like that. Unfortunately we have to deal with the woes of using those Silo's. There is a reason we're posting on our own sites after all :)

tinokremer commented Jan 26, 2016

You could be very right @kylewm. I think more people use it like that. Unfortunately we have to deal with the woes of using those Silo's. There is a reason we're posting on our own sites after all :)

@tinokremer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tinokremer

tinokremer Feb 5, 2016

Just a heads-up for people that may encounter the same issue. I removed a few posts from FB yesterday, including the second 'photo' that was causing this virtual album and a while later all comments and likes were imported. Bridgy probably was now able to retreive everything as the virtual album was removed and it's a single photo again.

Do we want to keep this issue open @snarfed?

tinokremer commented Feb 5, 2016

Just a heads-up for people that may encounter the same issue. I removed a few posts from FB yesterday, including the second 'photo' that was causing this virtual album and a while later all comments and likes were imported. Bridgy probably was now able to retreive everything as the virtual album was removed and it's a single photo again.

Do we want to keep this issue open @snarfed?

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Feb 5, 2016

Owner

glad to hear it!

let's keep this issue open, since the problem still exists in general. that way, if it happens to someone else, and they come here, they'll be able to find this issue.

Owner

snarfed commented Feb 5, 2016

glad to hear it!

let's keep this issue open, since the problem still exists in general. that way, if it happens to someone else, and they come here, they'll be able to find this issue.

@snarfed

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@snarfed

snarfed Jun 5, 2018

Owner

Facebook support is dead (#817, #826), so I'm closing this as obsolete. feel free to reopen if you have any concerns!

Owner

snarfed commented Jun 5, 2018

Facebook support is dead (#817, #826), so I'm closing this as obsolete. feel free to reopen if you have any concerns!

@snarfed snarfed closed this Jun 5, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment