I cannot remember why these were commented out, again I don't think it will affect existing deployments but unless @knoflook remembers more context I say we just revert the commenting-out change.
I cannot remember why these were commented out, again I don't think it will affect existing deployments but unless @knoflook remembers more context I say we just revert the commenting-out change.
Not sure if this changes the attack surface but in case it does, might be worth signalling in release notes and/or docs that a user: root is introduced into the stack deployment? Might be a consideration point since it's usually a central point of infra.
Not sure if this changes the attack surface but in case it does, might be worth signalling in release notes and/or docs that a `user: root` is introduced into the stack deployment? Might be a consideration point since it's usually a central point of infra.
I don't think it changes anything about existing deployments, unless someone opts-in to the extra .yml file.
It's hard for me to imagine how there could be a security hole in either cp, or su, but I don't claim to be an expert.
Happy to add a comment in .env.sample to warn about this, either way.
I don't think it changes anything about existing deployments, unless someone opts-in to the extra `.yml` file.
It's hard for me to imagine how there could be a security hole in either `cp`, or `su`, but I don't claim to be an expert.
Happy to add a comment in `.env.sample` to warn about this, either way.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
This PR adds an optional compose file,
compose.css-volume.yml, which allows hosters to store a completecustom.cssfile.💫
@@ -50,3 +50,1 @@COPY_ASSETS="flow_background.jpg|app:/web/dist/assets/images/"COPY_ASSETS="$COPY_ASSETS icon_left_brand.svg|app:/web/dist/assets/icons/"COPY_ASSETS="$COPY_ASSETS icon.png|app:/web/dist/assets/icons/"## custom css and assetsRequires some release notes for this change in behaviour?
I cannot remember why these were commented out, again I don't think it will affect existing deployments but unless @knoflook remembers more context I say we just revert the commenting-out change.
@@ -0,0 +3,4 @@services:app:user: rootNot sure if this changes the attack surface but in case it does, might be worth signalling in release notes and/or docs that a
user: rootis introduced into the stack deployment? Might be a consideration point since it's usually a central point of infra.I don't think it changes anything about existing deployments, unless someone opts-in to the extra
.ymlfile.It's hard for me to imagine how there could be a security hole in either
cp, orsu, but I don't claim to be an expert.Happy to add a comment in
.env.sampleto warn about this, either way.Tysm for the review @decentral1se !