• lemmyvore@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    They didn’t “strip” anything, they’ve split it into 2 variants, a package without networking features (-DWITH_XC_NETWORKING=OFF) and a package with them, because it’s considered a privacy issue to have your password manager phone home and fetch favicons and so on. The packages will be called keepassxc and keepassxc-full going forward.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I expect the KeepassXC people are mostly bothered by the naming of the package because the version called “keepassxc” is now the basic one. Anyway, the maintainer has offered to call them -minimal and -full and to make “keepassxc” a metapackage that pops up a debconf dialog telling users that install it to choose one. There is precedent with other complex packages that are split into basic and full. This should solve things nicely for everyone.

        • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          That sounds reasonable. I use the package on LMDE6, the one currently in stable though. Having a minimal keepassxc and a full one makes sense to me.

    • breakingcups@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I highly recommend reading the Github thread as this is not at all an accurate representation. These features you’re talking about are off by default. Removing them from the existing package is just breaking existing users. There’s already a report from a user who can’t access their passwords because yubikey support was suddenly removed. You don’t do that to users just because you suddenly develop an opinion as a package maintainer that you feel is important. There was no dialogue, no consideration and a very rude, dismissive attitude of Julian.

      https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues/10725

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s already a report from a user who can’t access their passwords because yubikey support was suddenly removed.

        Yeah, well, this is Sid. It’s called unstable for a reason. You have to read the changelogs or bad things will happen.

        By the time it lands in stable it will most likely have a debconf dialog warning users and letting them transition smoothly to the version they want.

    • federalreverse-old@feddit.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Afaiu it, he added a second package with (quote) “all the crap” later, after the storm.

      And no, it wasn’t just the favicons feature that was removed (which like … is that really such a big privacy issue that you need to remove it from the binary?). Support for Yubikey was removed as well — which is not a privacy issue. The reasoning mentioned by the Debian maintainer is that all of these features might turn out to be security issues in the long run. Thus, in his view, a password manager application must do nothing but provide access to the database within the app.

      I find it an interesting example of diverging upstream, maintainer, and user interests in any case.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I find it a lot of unnecessary fuss over unstable. Sid is supposed to make breaking changes, you offer feedback and you follow it through politely. The next Debian stable is one year away, this is not an urgent matter

      • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        And no, it wasn’t just the favicons feature that was removed (which like … is that really such a big privacy issue that you need to remove it from the binary?)

        Fetching a favicon means raising a network connection with a predictable endpoint. That’s already three concerns (four on the modern internet) to handle security-wise, and it’s absolutely an unneeded feature. Favicons could just be shipped on something like keepassxc-data or keepassxc-contrib to handle locally, no need to raise a network call.