- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- privacyguides@lemmy.one
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- privacyguides@lemmy.one
As mentioned in the comments, plain text keys aren’t bad because they are necessary. You have to have at least one plain text key in order to be able to use encryption
I think this is the more worrying part if true. The backend is licensed under the AGPL, so this would technically be a violation of their terms
Edit: For anyone else reading I looked into it a bit more and looks like the issue came to a head around 3 years ago, with this comment being made after a year of missing source code. The public repo has been pretty active since then, so the issue seems to be resolved
The AGPL doesn’t require you, the author, to do anything. As the copyright holder, you decide the license your code falls under. You publish code with a license so others can use it. You can always do with your own work on your own computers as you wish, assuming you don’t also use other (A)GPL code that forces you to release your own.
Many companies sell GPL software this way; the (A)GPL version is free to use, but if you don’t want to share your alterations and any code you integrate the (A)GPL code with, you pay money to get a non-AGPL licensed copy. Qt does this, for instance, so car manufacturers can design their closed source vehicle dashboards and open source projects can use Qt to build a Linux desktop.