should i be worried installing these two? what does it mean though?

(these are captured from Pop! OS software manager)

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The first one allows Flatseal to edit the permissions of Flatpak apps including itself.

    System folder access allows a app to read the filesystem. (But not system internals)

    System settings access allows the app to change settings

    So the only concerning one is Xournal. However, I happen to know that it doesn’t support XDG portals which is how apps ask for permissions to files so it needs full file access. As for the system settings I have no idea.

  • Sina@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Flatseal’s job is to do that. As for the note app, that’s not great, but you can use flatseal to take away those permissions after installation.

  • Mactan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    a curse upon these distros for alarming people with such messages. they are meaningless and technically apply to every flatpak

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      They mean that the app has that permission. It is good that they let the user know the apps capabilities

      • The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not for the average/casual user, which is why this post exists.

        The average person will look at that and see the ‘!’ in a triangle and became scared of what it can do to their system, even though it has no more permissions than a system package. Alternatively, they will become desensitized and learn to ignore it, resulting in installing flatpacks from untrusted and unverified sources.

        Overall, I just think the idea around having to sandbox all flatpaks is not a good idea. To give a concrete example, Librewolf is marked as “potentially unsafe” because it has access to the download folder, but if I want to use it to open a file that isn’t in “downloads” I have to use flatseal to give it extra permissions - it’s the worst of both worlds! Trying so hard to comply with flatpak guidelines that it gets in the way of doing things, and still not being considered safe enough.