There's a whole collection of this kind of search engine query at Hackers for Charity:
You can find neat stuff by adding site: qualifiers as well, like:
https://www.google.com/search?q=not+for+public+release+filet...
or
https://www.google.com/search?q=top+secret+filetype:pdf+site...
and
https://www.google.com/search?q="five+eyes"+filetype:pdf+sit...
etc.
There are even more "Top Secret" documents.
https://www.google.com/search?as_q=&as_epq=not+for+public+re...
(The above is sarcasm).
Offtopic but am I the only one seeing this? http://i.imgur.com/3pnOXot.png I thought google moved away from that black bar.
Much more interesting if you limit the search by time.
Less than a month old? A single screenful, mostly Australian.
A lot of these are redacted and appear to be FOIA or similar requests that have been fulfilled.
This one was quite sad. The suicide of an inmate: http://www.drc.ohio.gov/public/after_action_castroA643371.pd...
Isn't this one supposed to be public information anyways?: http://www.oema.us/files/FBI-OFFICES.pdf
I wonder if those are the sort of links that can leave you on the wrong side of the Computer Fraud and Abuse act...
Now subtract -"not for public release until"
Not quite the same, but the results for https://www.google.com/search?q=Hyperlinking+to+the+Site+fro... are interesting.
Priceless: https://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/1349/Finalproj_s1...
Kind of makes me want to take Geology there, sounds like a fun place.
Assuming filetype:docx is even worse?
Tennessee execution procedures? lovely
This is pretty interesting. One did say "Not for Public Release UNTIL", so could presumably be intended, but in a lot of cases webmasters probably didn't think something would be found and indexed by Google wherever they put it. And were wrong.
They should have at least have set an owner password for these documents. (In practice, they are not effective preventing people to disregard limitation that you set on the document, but at least it'll exclude documents for indexing at least by Google.)
What's especially crazy about these are that so many have been cached by Google. Anyone can read these docs and only Google would ever have a record.
Ironically, a lot of the top results now are about this phenomenon. Reminds me of that page that deleted it self when indexed
Combine with site:[url] for smaller scope. example: "not for public release" filetype:pdf site:house.gov
Much more interesting if you limit the search by time.
Less than a month old? A single screenful, mostly Australian.
Why use "filetype" and not "ext"? The results are identical.
This was one of the most ironic things I found: https://s3.amazonaws.com/reviz-tutorials/The_Pirates_Code.pd...