frenck 38 minutes ago
My replies there were more dismissive than they should have been. My apologies. I've posted a follow-up on the issue.
As it turns out, the check can already be turned off after all:
ha security options --pwned=false
It has been part of the Supervisor for years and checks app options that are marked as passwords. A recent release fixed the warning that surfaces it, which is why people are noticing it now.Only the first 5 characters of a SHA-1 hash go to HIBP, and the matching happens locally: https://github.com/home-assistant/supervisor/blob/main/super...
Our documentation should have explained all of this, including how to turn it off. We'll get that updated.
janice1999 an hour ago
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27505277
jackpepsi an hour ago
Edit: I'm sure a greater good argument can be made. I just don't think they are making it in a way that justifies the invasiveness.
interf4ce an hour ago
On the one hand, it's understandable. No amount of documentation changes will fix the issue.
On the other hand, it's a pretty abrasive response. It wouldn't have taken any more effort to be a little more helpful and direct OP to the right repo: "Sorry, this is the wrong place for this to be addressed. Please bring it up here instead [link]."
altairprime an hour ago
I have a great deal of sympathy for them refusing to engage; decisive software creators are far less palatable to an entitled swarm of disagreement, and that same decisiveness is what makes the best software. Perhaps in U.S. culture, refusal with a smile and a reassurance that “We’re Listening” is something folks feel entitled to, but in other areas of the world, demanding a stranger change their mind once it’s made up earns only mockery or pity. To those cultures, this GitHub is a comedy-farce, and I laughed out loud upon reading it — not because I necessarily agree with the project’s decision, but because I agree culturally with their tone and handling of what some view as blatant immaturity: a final flat refusal, closing the door, and getting back to work.
TavsiE9s an hour ago
TZubiri 30 minutes ago
>Sorry, these are not statements we can work with. Doing such threats and trying to intimidate it not going to bring you anywhere. If you want to do a
just wanted to add an outsider perspective here, not trying to add wood to the fire
but i don’t think it’s inappropriate or ‘a threat’ to let the dev know the user can stop using the software.
csoghoian an hour ago
thunderfork 15 minutes ago
Yeah, I agree with the maintainer, this strikes me as outrage theater over any actual problem, no?
Rygian an hour ago
And the first reply being "It is not an invasion of privacy" just shows incompetence on privacy topics. It is never a valid answer.
Which is really concerning, for the lead developer of a home automation system that "fights for the fundamental principle of privacy" as per their mission statement.
jocular 9 minutes ago
abletonlive 25 minutes ago
In this case, frenck most certainly backtracked because they realized they were on the front page of HN and did not want the heat.
flanz_10 an hour ago
what a petty answer. "just fork it bro".
Cameri 44 minutes ago
onionisafruit an hour ago
eur0pa an hour ago
l-albertovich an hour ago
pdfutils 31 minutes ago
rdevilla an hour ago
Comment deleted