Delete media Image does not delete ImageProcessor Cache

[tommyTanaka]

Which exact Umbraco version are you using? For example: 8.13.1 - don't just write v8

8.13.0

Bug summary

When a media image, that was used with crop-function before, will be deleted in the media section, the cached version of the crop (created by the image processor) still stays available on the server for a longer period of time (i guess standard-time will be 365 days as written in the cache.config of the image processor).

Specifics

We had a problem with a copyright-protected image. Our client got served noticed to remove the image and had to pay a fine. Some month later, our client got served noticed for the exact same image we already removed. The problem was, that it was still in the cache of the image processor and could be called by a crop-URL. And now, I just checked it again.

I deleted a pic - accessible before under this url: https://www.hotel-buergerstuben.de/media/vkrdue2c/steak.jpg

As you can see - it is removed. But if I add a used crop URL, you still can call the image: https://www.hotel-buergerstuben.de/media/vkrdue2c/steak.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=1280&height=700&rnd=132692703894230000

I think this is not really as it should work - and I don't want to clear the complete cache-folder just to get rid of one single image.

Steps to reproduce

• Upload an image
• create a crop
• call the crop of the image on a page/template
• remember the url of the origin image an the crop-image
• delete the image in the media file
• origin url will run into 404 - the crop-path is still available and shows the deleted image

Expected result / actual result

When an image is deleted, all umbraco-based cache-relations should be cleared too.

[emma-hq]

Hey @tommyTanaka

I wanted to let you know that I'm taking a look at this currently. I'll reproduce, check against previous releases and let you know how we plan to proceed. Thanks ever so much for flagging and adding all the specifics above. It's really helpful.

Emma

[emma-hq]

Hey @tommyTanaka

Yep, this behaviour has been an issue for some time. I checked back to 8.7.1 and it is still the case. I think I recall some chat around this in v7 too and the outcome was that some devs built an obfuscator to handle it. I'll label as up-for-grabs because I think this could be a really good issue for a community member to work with. Naturally, if you'd like to do that, we'd be happy to look at a PR from you. The joys of open source!

Emma

[umbrabot]

Hi @tommyTanaka,

We're writing to let you know that we would love some help with this issue. We feel that this issue is ideal to flag for a community member to work on it. Once flagged here, folk looking for issues to work on will know to look at yours. Of course, please feel free work on this yourself ;-). If there are any changes to this status, we'll be sure to let you know.

For more information about issues and states, have a look at this blog post

Thanks muchly, from your friendly Umbraco GitHub bot :-)

[umbrabot]

Hiya @tommyTanaka,

Just wanted to let you know that we noticed that this issue got a bit stale and might not be relevant any more.

We will close this issue for now but we're happy to open it up again if you think it's still relevant (for example: it's a feature request that's not yet implemented, or it's a bug that's not yet been fixed).

To open it this issue up again, you can write @umbrabot still relevant in a new comment as the first line. It would be super helpful for us if on the next line you could let us know why you think it's still relevant.

For example:

@umbrabot still relevant
This bug can still be reproduced in version x.y.z

This will reopen the issue in the next few hours.

Thanks, from your friendly Umbraco GitHub bot 🤖 🙂