I found 39 Algolia admin keys exposed across open source documentation sites (benzimmermann.dev)
150 points by kernelrocks 20 hours ago
tcbrah 16 hours ago
the wildest part is algolia just not responding. you email them saying "hey 39 of your customers have admin keys in their frontend" and they ghost you? thats way worse than the keys themselves imo. like the whole point of docsearch is they manage the crawling FOR you, but then the "run your own crawler" docs basically hand you a footgun with zero guardrails. they could just... not issue admin-scoped keys through that flow
gregoriol 12 hours ago
Why contact Algolia when it is the users' responsibility to handle their keys? Contact all the users.
pwdisswordfishy 5 hours ago
The comment you're responding to is output of an LLM.
mmooss an hour ago
Kwpolska 9 hours ago
If this happens so often, perhaps Algolia should improve their stuff to prevent this? For example, by implementing a dedicated search endpoint that doesn't accept normal API keys, but only dedicated read-only keys.
interstice 8 hours ago
It is the users responsibility to operate foot guns responsibly.
jgalt212 6 hours ago
because if it's easy to dangerously use one's product that reflect poorly on the product. Algolia should help its clients from making silly mistakes.
Dazzler5648 4 hours ago
Thanks for this. I was maybe using one of these keys until this morning. When I logged in at dashboard.algolia.com and went to Settings -> API Keys, I found that none of the keys (Search, Analytics, Usage, Monitoring) matched the key I was using on a frontend. I made a decent attempt looking for that old key anywhere in their admin panels and could not find it. poof!
So perhaps at some point, they were only giving admin keys (because I don't remember there being a choice; and I would think given the choice I'd make the right one) and when called out (or sometime prior) realized the problem and made a new Settings -> API Keys page. Currently on the page the first one listed is the Search Key, with the subtext "This is the public API key which can be safely used in your frontend code. This key is usable for search queries and it's also able to list the indices you've got access to."
pmdr 10 hours ago
Twenty years ago every PHP website had search. We forgot how to do it.
gus_massa 7 hours ago
I remember that time, it was usually better to go to google and use "site:".
NicuCalcea 3 hours ago
I still do that for almost everything.
Etheryte 7 hours ago
Having a search and having a functional search are two very different things though. To this day, the search on many sites is so bad that it's actually better to use a search engine and scope by site rather than use the site search.
omnimus 10 hours ago
To be fair, the search was thanks to databases and it was usually not very good (it takes work to set correctly).
profer602 2 hours ago
This highlights a systemic problem: developers often prioritize speed of integration over security hygiene, especially when dealing with third-party services. The tradeoff is acceptable until it isn't. We need better tooling to automatically detect and flag these types of exposures before they make it to production.
ErneX 30 minutes ago
LLM.
dawnerd 5 hours ago
Algolia really needs to make using the admin key less easy. I’ve almost copied it before when setting up a frontend. It should be tucked away and require auth to view.
stickynotememo 20 hours ago
So why hasn't the HomeAssistant docs page been nuked yet?
netsharc 20 hours ago
Man, talk about unnecessary graphs... ok graph 2 is maybe tolerable, although it's showing the popularity of the projects, not a metric of how many errors/vulnerabilities found in those projects.
I'm not a newspaper editor, but I think if this was an article for one, they'd also say the graphs are unnecessary. It smells of "I need some visual stuff to make this text interesting"...
binarymax 19 hours ago
Dude there’s only three graphs in there. Do they really bother you that much? The third may be a bit unnecessary but I think the visuals add to the post.
throwaway5465 19 hours ago
It's Friday night / Saturday morning. Who wants to be reading text?
Especially on night mode themes.
Besides, can we read anymore? In the age of 'GPT summarise it me' attention spans and glib commentary not about the content of the article being all many people have to add, perhaps liberal application of visualisations adds digestive value.
osos2 12 hours ago
kay_o 9 hours ago
still 404 but the standard is .well-known/security.txt
trrra 12 hours ago
Is this aloglia's (or any provider) responsability or each individual integration ?
TechSquidTV 18 hours ago
I have been developing an OpenClaw-like agent that automates exactly this type of attack.
_pdp_ 18 hours ago
Why? This is just regex search and there are plenty of tools that do this perfectly fine.
emotiveengine 15 hours ago
Have to agree with _pdp_ on this one. I just don't see the need for an LLM agent to do a recursive grep for API keys in public repos.
Not saying people shouldn't build these tools, but the use case is lost on me.
It feels like the industry is in this weird phase of trying to replace 30-year-old, perfectly optimized shell utilities with multi-shot agent workflows that literally cost money to run. A basic Python script with a regex matcher and the GitHub API will find these keys faster, cheaper, and more reliably.
jgalt212 6 hours ago
because the poster works for Accenture.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/acc...
system2 17 hours ago
None of those proven tools would make a man feel like a wannabe Mr. Robot.
hrmtst93837 12 hours ago
Automating these sweeps works fine until you need to escalate beyond public misconfig and start hitting rate limits or WAF traps, at that point, blending in gets harder than it looks. If you focus on fast key discovery, expect a lot of false positives unless you build context awareness for the apps those keys unlock, otherwise you just end up chasing useless tokens all day.
fix4fun 20 hours ago
Interesting how many people already are playing with these API keys ? ;)
toomuchtodo 20 hours ago
Great write up. Reminder that if you commit these to a Github Gist and the provider partners with GitHub for secrets scanning, they’ll rapidly be invalidated.
pwdisswordfishy 20 hours ago
That's just a tautology.
"If the secrets issuer partners with X-corp for secret scanning so that secrets get invalidated when you X them, then when you X them the secrets will be invalidated".
The above is a true statement for all X.
nightpool 20 hours ago
? Yes? Toomuchtodo is reminding the author (and other commenters), that github gists are one way to make sure secrets are secured / remediated before making a public post like this. Maybe not the most responsible whitehat action, but I can see it being useful in some cases where outreach is impractical / has failed.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Algolia has implemented this
TurdF3rguson 19 hours ago
wat10000 19 hours ago
English is not formal logic.
In formal logic, that statement is true whether X is GitHub, or Lockheed-Martin, Safeway, or the local hardware store.
In English, the statement serves to inform (or remind) you that GitHub has a secret scanning program that many providers actually do partner with.