![]() On November 8, 2022, Airtable will improve the security of our attachment URLs by incorporating an expiring links functionality. :money_mouth_face:īut even those users will get hurt with this update. So, my take is that Airtable does this on purpose, because this way it forces all end-users to use Airtable the way they intended to, through the UI, with a dedicated account. This will break like all our current workflows using attachments, and makes the nice UI to upload file completely obsolete to us and all our users.įor instance, allowing to specify in the Attachment field whether to use a temporary link (and how long) would be so much simpler and effective. There are many other ways to achieve a similar result (where security is enforced) while doing it in a smart way that doesn’t hit all customers where it hurts. Supposedly being a security update, it’s more of a shitty update, speaking frankly. This basically mean all urls to all attachments uploaded prior to that date will cease to work, and all attachments public leads uploaded from there will only work for a “ few hours” (would be great to know exactly how long, by the way). The requirement to manage digital assets separate and apart from the data model always existed we just chose to sidestep those requirements for simplicity, faster time-to-production, and for our own profit of course.:bomb: Airtable is dropping public url support for attachment in an upcoming update that will take place in Nov 2022. It’s just 100k - no big deal, right?Īs it turns out - it’s a big deal irrespective of size.īinary assets are best integrated into data systems by reference, not by value. At what point do you realize that making copies is impractical? Sadly, we use size as a justification for convenience and tolerance of the laziness Airtable has afforded us historically. Imagine a 10k image, a 100k image, and a 100GB video. The key takeaway is that it was never a good idea to lazily make copies of artefacts. And in those specific threads, I advised clients and all users to consider the idea that in mission-critical applications where there is a distinct dependency on binary artefacts, you best address them by REFERENCE, not by VALUE. Most of my threads are related to API-uploads that are unreliable. I did a quick search and I alone have warned of this delicate and likely-to-vanish pattern 27 times in this community. This is the gotcha’ moment that everyone is surprised about and some of us saw it and warned of it for many years. They never promised immutable and sustained addressability to those attachments outside of the Airtable UI. Inexperienced database makers don’t typically think about the architectural consequences of using a feature designed for internal use in an external dependency.Īirtable promised that you could upload attachments as “copies” of documents and images and they have upheld that promise. But there have been warning signals here in the community going back as far as 2018. Yep - this is a safe assumption and Airtable could have managed this better. I assume static URLs to attachements is used overwhelmingly by users who link to image attachments. The party ended in 2019 we just didn’t know it. Have you considered signed-URLs 6 and a new API method that would give us the ability to create signed URLs for attachment documents? I have to believe you and the team are pondering how and when this design must change. “Security by obscurity” are often the last words any CEO remembers just before seeing the “On-Air” light flash from a chair at CNBC as they queue up Kate Fazzini 6 to drill you about a security breach. I get it - the hash-keys for any given document are unpredictable and this is the basis for claiming they are secure. Unbeknownst to most users – all attached documents in a base are openly exposed in a CDN-like environment (i.e., dl. 6 ). ![]() I (and many of my clients) have trepidation about this and it is a factor that often rules out Airtable as a choice. ![]() ![]() Related to this topic are the attachment URLs themselves (which are publicly accessible). If you’re a total geek and recognize the importance of data architectures that include binary artifacts by reference, not by value - you might enjoy this thread from about three years ago where I predicted Airtable would eventually realize their shortfalls in the attachment design.Įvan Hahn (Airtable Engineer with Deep Insight) I predicted this change in 2019 and even encouraged Airtable to weigh in on the risks associated with the idea that (a) it makes no sense to treat image URLs as immutable and sustained, and (b) that it makes no sense to assume that Airtable (a database for small systems) is also going to provide you with a globally sustained CDN for free. This has a HUGE and sadly dramatic affect on my application.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |