Spyware Sucks
“There is no magic fairy dust protecting Macs" – Dai Zovi, author of “The Mac Hacker’s Handbook"

Sometimes the time stamps applied to IE’s RSS Feeds are incorrect

October 25th 2006 in Uncategorized

No, we can not blame the Neowin and Bink snafu on this…. [;)]

Check out this screenshot which indicates that one of my blog posts had gone live 3 hours earlier…

Now, check out this screen shot, which seems to indicate that the Secunia article I am talking about had been published just two hours earlier, *after* my article went live:

I am not sure why this happened but the most likely cause that occurs to me is that the time reflects when I turned on my laptop and downloaded the articles, as distinct to when the articles hit the aggregators.  The hour or so discrepancy as far as the Secunia entry is concerned could be explained by the Secunia feed being unavailable for a while.  That being said, I'm open to suggestions as to what else may have caused the glitch.

2 comments to...
“Sometimes the time stamps applied to IE’s RSS Feeds are incorrect”

Rob Nicholls

The Secunia feed doesn’t contain a pubDate for each item, so the RSS Platform will store whatever the local time (I think) is on your PC as a default when it saves the feed archive on your PC. That’s why you might notice items above and below it with exactly the same date and time. Your feed DOES provide the pubDate (although it says GMT, so presumably isn’t your local time, just to make things even more confusing), which is presumably why your post appears to have been made before Secunia’s.

Basically, it’s Secunia’s fault for not providing a timestamp for each article (or pubDate for each item).

Rob Nicholls

PS The Secunia feed default schedule for updates is 2 hours

Sandi says: Thanks Rob.  IE's feed synch service is not IE dependent (it runs even when IE is shut down) and will automatically poll when the PC has been turned on.  It looks like I fired up my laptop in between Secunia updates [:)]

My RSS feeds alerted me today to the fact that a new article had gone live on bink.nu reporting that Scott Richter has agreed to pay Microsoft UK$7 million – but… that news sure does look familiar.http://bink.nu/Article8625.binkEdit: Hm, the above URL won't load ATM – did Bink.nu delete the article? 8624 is still there…Huh? Neowin […]

Previous Entry

I haven't seen IE7 offered via "automatic update" on any of my non-WSUS managed machines yet, but IE7 was offered on a machine on which I conducted a manual scan via Microsoft Update.This may explain the reports in the support newsgroups that IE7 was being offered via "automatic updates" within days of IE7 being released […]

Next Entry