Any word on if this is still planned?
Any further extensions?
Or is the drop-dead deadline still August 16th?
Why is Twitter announcing a major API change over the holidays? Why
are they giving us just a few (mostly holiday!) days to account for
it?
Please either a) preserve the existing calls, or b) give us a 3 month
window before deprecating. This is a new API change.
Given that many have commented
Yes, I am also having x-ratelimit not show up after I have received
"OK: 200" errors.
I believe this is due to timeout issues.
Specifically, I often find that I am returned partial JSON (lack of
closing syntax) without the ratelimit header, e.g.:
'_rc' => 200,
'_headers' => bless( {
'connectio
I am still getting these bizarre "OK: 200" errors with returned
content like...
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd";> -->
On Aug 9, 12:35 pm, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> Are there any new requirements we have to comply with for calls to the
> Search API?
>
> I presume we
n't need
> any more distractions or you checking up on them. Call that
> non-transparent if you wish; I call it letting them get their job
> done.
>
> We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
>
> Thanks you, as always, for your continued patience in the matter.
See here:
http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/browse_thread/thread/acdcb4baf76037c8/d5f4d4204b65d617#d5f4d4204b65d617
On Aug 9, 12:17 am, Bill Kocik wrote:
> I remember seeing "200 errors" somewhere, but I didn't read the
> details. 200 means status okay, what's the indica
My point was that my browsing of the tweetstreams of the Twitter
engineers I am familiar with, ops and otherwise, reveals another
normal weekend, with all the loveliness that the Bay Area has to
offer... and while there may be a bunch of Keebler elves drinking
coffee and working hard, I don't see
Yep, for sure. And maybe the rash of new 200 errors, and OAuth
errors, etc, are not under the purview of API (though I would doubt
it).
But, at the very least, it's over another, what, 48 hours since the
last official update. And those developer updates are presumably the
responsibility of API
And, by the way, if you're a deckhand on a submarine going down, you
think you would go to a movie because it's your time off, or do
whatever you can to help out?
On Aug 8, 11:47 pm, chinaski007 wrote:
> Part of it is DDOS response, part of it is API issues... as one of the
&
Part of it is DDOS response, part of it is API issues... as one of the
updates most recently noted with the "known issues" list.
On Aug 8, 11:42 pm, Bill Kocik wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2:28 am, chinaski007 wrote:
>
> > You're wrong.
>
> > If you check the tweets
You're wrong.
If you check the tweets of the other main Twitter developers, you will
see that they are doing sushi, rock concerts, weddings, watching
movies on Saturday afternoon, etc. And while "getting married" is
certainly a legitimate excuse, some of the other activities, during
this major
As other media have noted, when Twitter goes down, people swap to
FriendFeed, Facebook, etc.
The same thing happens when Twitter apps go down. The problem with
this outage is that it largely effects third-party Web-based apps.
And so when our apps go down, for whatever reason, people swap to
de
(Okay, in those I am seeing a header with "read timeout"... the empty
ones are still coming fast and furious.)
On Aug 8, 8:59 pm, chinaski007 wrote:
> I am now getting "OK: 200" errors after requesting, e.g., friends
> ids. The response returned is the 200 error
tive answer from them.
> -Chad
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:10 PM, chinaski007 wrote:
>
> > Now getting a ton of these errors... empty body, and nothing
> > meaningful in headers.
>
> > What are they??
>
>
Now getting a ton of these errors... empty body, and nothing
meaningful in headers.
What are they??
I should have taken my own advice when I ranted about Basic Auth being
far more reliable than OAuth.
On Aug 8, 3:37 pm, Josh Roesslein wrote:
> Oauth has been on and off through out this DoS attack. Sometimes it work
> sometimes not.
> Only work around right now is to fall back to basic auth. I
If Twitter.com itself were down, you know that they would stay there
until it was back up.
But since it is just a large number of third party apps that are
down... well, hey, it's a weekend in August!
Grrr.
On Aug 8, 4:55 pm, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
> Seriously, anyone who has worked an Ops gig
Thanks for the update... keep 'em comin!
On Aug 7, 9:53 pm, Dusty wrote:
> Thank you for the update! Totally appreciate the candidness.
>
> On Aug 7, 11:38 pm, "Michael E. Carluen" wrote:
>
> > Chad,
>
> > As its been already said but deserves another mention... THANK YOU for the
> > unsugar-c
Aug 7, 7:58 pm, chinaski007 wrote:
> Frustrating. The last official status update on the API issue was 10
> hours ago. I would like to be able to update our app's users of
> SOMETHING other than "Twitter says they are working on it". I am not
> touching our code to
Frustrating. The last official status update on the API issue was 10
hours ago. I would like to be able to update our app's users of
SOMETHING other than "Twitter says they are working on it". I am not
touching our code to handle all the new hoops on the assumption that
those requirements will
Hey guys:
Any chance you can fill us in on what's happening? Can we restart
crons? Is there an ETA for a solution? Will work on this continue
through the weekend?
Cheers...
My IPs quickly go back to 20k/hour if I turn off cron jobs. When I
turn on cron jobs (and thus do a large number of API calls), the IPs
quickly descend into 150/hour hell.
Okay, my high-volume app has been dead in the water for the past 12
hours. My formerly whitelisted IPs have been limited to 150 calls.
API calls ARE getting through... but are limited to 150/hour rather
than 20k/hour.
This suggests to me that the problem is on Twitter's side (rather than
with
My whitelisted IPs were 20k limit, then blocked, then 20k limit, and
now blocked again.
Can't you somehow sync the API whitelist ips with the host?
On Aug 6, 11:18 pm, John Kalucki wrote:
> The DDoS continues. Your stream could dry up due to any number of
> network components hitting saturatio
Okay, IPs now appear to be back to 20k.
On Aug 6, 1:51 pm, Haewoon wrote:
> me, too.
>
> In my case, one of 10 IPs has reverted.
>
> On Aug 7, 5:43 am, chinaski007 wrote:
>
> > Even worse... IPs are showing 0/150 remaining hits constantly, thus
> > bringing my
UGH! All of my whitelisted IPs have reverted from 20k/hour limit to a
150/hour limit.
Anyone else??
What the heck?!
Even worse... IPs are showing 0/150 remaining hits constantly, thus
bringing my app to a total HALT.
On Aug 6, 1:39 pm, chinaski007 wrote:
> UGH! All of my whitelisted IPs have reverted from 20k/hour limit to a
> 150/hour limit.
>
> Anyone else??
>
> What the heck?!
There is no direct way to do this, no. But you might be able to
accomplish the same thing in an interesting way. Create a new Twitter
account that exclusively follows users of your app. When you request
statuses/friends for that new account, you will get current
information and most recent twe
If I understand your problem correctly, I believe this is already a
known issue that Twitter is working on. See here:
http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/detail?id=846&colspec=ID%20Stars%20Type%20Status%20Priority%20Owner%20Summary%20Opened%20Modified%20Component
ur Oauth Implementation, Mine's been working steadily
> > > > with no hiccups: Lot's of very solid implementations out there.
>
> > > > As far as the user sign-up problem, Yeah, I agree, It's a bit of a
> > > > scare for the user to have
If you are using Net::Twitter in Perl, the developer released a new
release today that now correctly handles OAuth and Unicode-related
issues.
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Net-Twitter/
On Jul 28, 3:21 pm, Scott Carter wrote:
> This post is geared toward Perl implementations of OAuth, though it
When you say 95%, do you derive that percentage from the number of
people who click on "access via OAuth" (or whatever) and then "Allow"
the authorization? Or do you mean 95% of the unauthenticated who
visit your particular page authenticate via OAuth?
On Jul 28, 1:08 pm, jmathai wrote:
> I wa
Ugh, terrible situation here. Things working 99.9% of the time now
with Perl. But we continue to get bizarre intermittent errors that
span the range of API calls. We are thinking that internal hash re-
ordering may invalidate signatures, but that is just speculation.
> OAuth IS unfamiliar, YES. OAuth DOES ask more of the user, YES.
So what's the upside for the third-party developer?
In terms of security, we've already seen how OAuth-like applications
in, e.g., Facebook have led to massive hacker/phishing/etc problems.
While OAuth solves one leg of the secu
e "friends" in Nigeria that are
> willing to send them money?
>
> I think that is the statistical significance to which TjL was referring. At
> least, I hope so.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:12, chinaski007 wrote:
>
> > Sorry about that... I deleted th
Sorry about that... I deleted those threads before posting this one.
I gather you are choosing to receive emails individually.
The tests were statistically significant at 95% confidence levels.
On Jul 28, 8:09 am, TjL wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:27 AM, chinaski007 wrote:
> >
Let's be honest...
The end-result for third-party developers using OAuth appears to be
fewer sign-ups, less reliability, more complexity, and potentially
less security.
Google Optimizer reveals that users are more likely to sign-up for
Basic Auth than OAuth. That's just fact. Test it for your
(Then again, given that this was a Twitter security flaw, I guess I
can kind of understand how they favored not to pre-announce this fix.
That said, some consideration to developers would have been
appreciated.)
(I should mention that this post was made at 3am after handling errors
due to surprise, surprise Twitter API changes to OAuth made at ~5pm
(some kind of joke to checkin changes at end of workday??)... and
that's after a 8am workday start. And that's after last week's limit
to verify_credentials
Do you use Google Optimizer?
If not, go there. Setup a test to compare sign-ups to your app
between OAuth and Basic Auth. Give 50% the option to sign up with
OAuth; 50% the option to sign up with Basic Auth. The results may
surprise you.
In my tests, I have found statistically significant mor
OAuth is just not ready for primetime on Twitter.
I have used Google Optimizer to test user response to OAuth versus
Basic Auth, and users are far more likely to give Basic Auth details
rather than cumbersome and weird (from the user's perspective) OAuth.
>From the user's perspective, OAuth appe
I have found the problem in the library I am using: First, a Twitter
request object is created. Second, a signature is generated. Third,
params are then added to the request object. This addition of the
params after the signing invalidates the signature. All params need
to be added before sign
I have found the problem in the Perl library I am using.
Using Perl libraries. Will mess around and see what I can do. Super
annoying.
This may solve your problem, but it doesn't work for me. I am getting
errors for API calls that have no spaces, such as create friend,
destroy, etc.
Confirmed. Google Playground does not work.
It appears that this has been a known issue for 10 days, at least
judging by this tweet:
http://twitter.com/timwhitlock/statuses/2697185141
This is frustrating for those of us relying on authentication
libraries which now may no longer work. The apparent solution is to
either recode the possibly problematic library oneself, or encourage
users to swap to Basic Authentication.
While I certainly understand Twitter's need to ensure tha
This is very frustrating.
Doug:
Does this mean that Marcel made a fix for this? Or rather that we
should examine our code to find the culprit?
Thanks,
Peter Bray
On Jul 27, 6:24 pm, Doug Williams wrote:
> Updating you guys on this problem. A bug was reported off list that informed
> us we were not always verifying si
Not sure if my message went through. I am also getting this error...
"incorrect signature" as of about 30 mins ago.
Any ideas???
On Jul 27, 5:26 pm, goodtest wrote:
> twitter api server seems to be down (getting invalid signature) since
> 5.15 pm pst
Yep, likewise. I am getting 100s of "incorrect signature" errors.
On Jul 27, 5:26 pm, goodtest wrote:
> twitter api server seems to be down (getting invalid signature) since
> 5.15 pm pst
52 matches
Mail list logo
