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.
"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.
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.
Yeah, it's especially useful in that case. Useful to attackers, because someone "helpfully" showed up with "reminder" that reads like a suggestion to post these specific secrets (or any other Algolia secrets that other HNers might have come across) in the open out of some misguided belief that doing so will invalidate them.
This has to be one of the dumbest, most reckless threads to have been posted (and so vociferously defended) on HN.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Algolia has implemented this
if algolia keys have this predictable pattern, then they can enroll in secret scanning. If they don't then they probably can't