Today I was inducting a new user into our system where we wanted this person to do a maintenance function for certain records in our WWII Soldier database system.
So I created a new screen and linked the update record screen with a button at the bottom.
Everything went fine until she clicked the “new button”.
“error”:“Account not found”
well thats weird. So i logged me out and logged on as her no problem encountered.
tried a couple things, logout refresh, clear cache nope still no go
so i got another reseacher to try - same issue
i got them to send me the url that was being seen in their browser and got this
This is what they were getting - what I was getting was
So I googled it (mores the fool me)
The ‘fbclid’ parameter that you’re seeing in your Google Analytics reports is a new parameter which Facebook is adding to outbound links shared on Facebook . So if a link to your site is shared on Facebook now, and someone clicks on it to visit your site, Facebook is adding this parameter to the link
Surely farcebook does not have the legal right to go embedding its ridiculous crap inside internal private database links accessed through a browser ? Particularly when their insertion causes errors in the functionality of the database.
Now I managed to highlight that it is indeed to do with facebook after 2 tries.
i got them to clear cache shutdown knack close the tab and log back in again. ERROR
Then I got them to close their facebook and messenger sessions, knack session, clear cache and shutdown browser then come back in and go straight into the Knack database. BINGO - NO ERROR
I am getting them to do more tomorrow during daylight hours but I have not personally been able to replicate the error. My Messenger and Facebook has not caused any embedded links in my url chain.
Regardless of whether I have or have not shared links this SURELY DOES NOT GIVE FACEBOOK OR GOOGLE THE RIGHT to modify links within a private and supposedly secure database environment.
Anyone else encountered this problem ?
Not encountered this issue.
Have you reported to firstname.lastname@example.org
Hi Carl Knack Support have confirmed it happens occassionally and that the corruption of the link is because the link was shared via MESSENGER.
So obviously we need to not use messenger to direct someone to a page in future. Simple solution BUT IT DOES NOT remove the fact that this is a breech of private and confidential communications between two people and a breech of the security of a non facebook related “secure website containing a database”.
UNACCEPTABLE BY FACEBOOK AND A BREECH OF OUR PRIVACY.
if you want to test it send someone a ficticious link to a non existant page in messenger
example : faceful.com/garbagelink/test/
then click the link when it has been sent to the other person
it will open the link with the url modified to
We use messenger as an easy way to answer queries from researchers who are remote from our location (its a voluntary organisation). So I have instructed people to not share database links on messenger. Basicvally they will need to type instructions on what screen they are looking at and what record in future.
Good to know you got to the bottom of it
I apologize in advance for the non-helpful message If you want privacy do not use Facebook. It is a free product because you are the product This type of practice is the bread and butter of their business model.
Agree a NON-helpful message.
The service you refer to refers to is a messaging system they make available which allows for privacy to be maintained between those two people. i.e its not viewable readily by others because it is a one to one connection between those two people. Note I said readily. But just because it’s not encrypted does not give anyone the right to MODIFY the information being sent from one person to another in that mode otherwise they could, theoretically modify it to interfere in the relationship with the other person or incorrect information. Accepted it is a public facility but it is a one to one conversation. Not one to one + facebook.
MODIFYING a shared url link between said two people such that it interferes with the operation of that link is not part of their bread and butter model (despite what you think) because functionally the link canot be used because of the interference of the parameters they insert.
I have no issue with them modifying links on a post shared online to a group (though I do tend to disagree with it) you have made the information public/available on a public/semi-private forum. But excusing their intereference on the basis its their bread and butter model within a one-one or one to closed group of individuals is clearly overstepping the boundaries of acceptability.
I did not mean to be disrespectful or condescending, sorry. I could have phrased my answer better. I guess what I was trying to say is that unfortunately by using Facebook we basically give up on our privacy, and “agree” to all kinds of practices that violate our privacy.
I personally disagree with those practices and this is why I try to avoid anything Facebook as much as possible. But I understand it is not possible for everyone or every business. Did you check Slack? Their free tier is pretty good (if you don’t need old messages), it works great on mobile and no more invasion of privacy.
All good - unfortunately my researchers are more experienced at researching grave websites, government service records , archived newspaper sites than migrating to something like slack for communications. They essentialy spend the better part of the day on facebook, ancestry, messenger etc. and used hand held tablets and mobile phones. It is what it is.
I have forewarned them that no link sharing is to be done on Messenger in future and if u need to send something sign into whatsapp or send an email.
I over reacted a buit so my apologies. I was and am so pissed off that it occured and is allowed to continue in such a fashion