rugk

Just tried to apply this, but apparently already fixed in https://github.com/PrivateBin/PrivateBin/commit/b32efe01879c4d466140a5af19430516f096ec6c (@elrido dunno maybe PRs would be useful also for finding changes, master pushes are always hmm…)

> récipient field because it was good enough for me and also simpler to implement, but I guess the field could be move to the encrypted part of the paste's...

Hmm AFAIK env configuration is best practise for containers. Theoretically it may be worse, but well… everyone does it. So I fully support this proposal. It is also not mentioned...

Regarding the benefit: I guess it is with Docker-compose [you have flexible ways for setting your env vars](https://docs.docker.com/compose/environment-variables/set-environment-variables/). You can separate the envs in an env file etc., create files...

Yeah, dunno and in any case thanks for the interesting links. (Though [that OWASP example 3](https://owasp.org/www-community/attacks/Command_Injection) BTW also talks about "elevated privilege of the application" so it assumes some kind...

> for I18n.php, the issues is that we accept a dynamic number of arguments - maybe recent phpdoc has a solution how to document this without causing an error? Similar...

> PS: Can you suggest a progress bar showing a percentage or speed when uploading attachments and decrypting them? It makes for a friendlier experience. See https://github.com/PrivateBin/PrivateBin/issues/9

Also I'd ask you to create one issue per feature request/separate idea. That said, your second idea is, however, already tracked in https://github.com/PrivateBin/PrivateBin/issues/833, which you can upvote if you want...

Hmm there is flatpak support, but I could not find it on flathub? https://flathub.org/apps/search?q=open%20age https://flathub.org/apps/search?q=openage It would be nice if you could publish this as a [flatpak](https://flatpak.org/) on [flathub](https://flathub.org/) e.g....

So maybe reopen this issue?