Bug #15275

Remove the GNOME Keyring persistent feature

Added by sajolida 2018-02-01 17:49:37 . Updated 2018-03-22 09:53:50 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Persistence
Target version:
Tails_3.9
Start date:
2018-02-01
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
perl5lib:feature/14594-asp-gui, iuk:feature/14594-asp-gui, persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

I don’t know myself what it’s good for in Tails, in terms of practical use cases.

Our documentation says that it’s needed to save the passwords of Wi-Fi networks but it’s not true: I deactivated GNOME Keyring and deleted the underlying files and I still autoconnect to my Wi-Fi network. The passwords are saved in the nm-system-connections files.

Subtasks

Related issues

Related to Tails - Feature #15265: Propose a new order of the persistent feature Resolved 2018-01-29
Related to Tails - Feature #15280: Reorder persistence features Resolved 2018-04-17
Related to Tails - Feature #16718: Consider adding back a Persistence feature for GNOME keyring Resolved

History

#1 Updated by sajolida 2018-02-01 17:49:47

  • related to Feature #15265: Propose a new order of the persistent feature added

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2018-02-02 05:31:20

> Our documentation says that it’s needed to save the passwords of Wi-Fi networks but it’s not true

Indeed, that’s been wrong since Jessie or something.
And IIRC that was the sole reason why we added this persistence feature in the first place so full ACK for removing!

#3 Updated by intrigeri 2018-02-05 13:19:08

#4 Updated by segfault 2018-02-12 18:00:37

I just noticed that we document another use case for a persistent GNOME Keyring: Storing the passphrase of encrypted volumes.

#5 Updated by sajolida 2018-02-14 12:31:49

Thanks for spotting that. I did some test and indeed if I choose to remember a password for an encrypted USB stick, it is stored in TailsData_unlocked/gnome-keyring/tails.keyring.

Removing the option might break use cases for people and I need to give it a second thought…

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2018-02-17 08:13:18

> Removing the option might break use cases for people

My understanding is that:

  • it will make it harder for new users who use an app that saves passwords there to make these passwords persistent
  • it will make the persistence configuration interface simpler (less choices) for everyone else
  • it won’t break anything for users who already have made GNOME Keyring data persistent

#7 Updated by sajolida 2018-02-19 18:59:04

  • Assignee changed from sajolida to intrigeri
  • QA Check set to Info Needed
  • Type of work changed from Discuss to Code

> * it won’t break anything for users who already have made GNOME Keyring data persistent

Because of Feature #8447? I didn’t think about that. That’s cool :)

Then I’m convinced again that we should remove it.

intrigeri: as the author of the persistence configuration, do you want to work on this yourself or shall we leave it to someone else?

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2018-02-19 20:27:18

  • Assignee changed from intrigeri to sajolida

sajolida wrote:
> > * it won’t break anything for users who already have made GNOME Keyring data persistent
>
> Because of Feature #8447?

Nope, this has nothing to do with deleting the data or not, it’s about enabling a line in persistence.conf or not. Let me explain. Whether we display or not a persistence feature in the persistence config GUI does not affect what’s in the config file. Hiding it from the GUI won’t delete the corresponding line in the config file if it was already present there. I did not test this recently but that’s how I think the code works. For example, that’s why you can have custom persistence config lines in persistence.conf, and they’re not deleted when you run the config GUI.

Does this make you change your mind or do you still want us to do that?

> intrigeri: as the author of the persistence configuration, do you want to work on this yourself or shall we leave it to someone else?

I can do that at the same time as Feature #15280 (early March, to be completed by the end of June, shipped in 3.8). It’s mostly deleting a few lines in the code and decrementing some hard-coded integer values in the test suite accordingly.

#9 Updated by sajolida 2018-02-20 16:27:48

  • Assignee changed from sajolida to intrigeri
  • QA Check deleted (Info Needed)

> Does this make you change your mind or do you still want us to do that?

I still want us to do that :)

Waiting until you work on Feature #15280 is fine.

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-01 09:59:52

  • Feature Branch set to persistence-setup:feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-01 10:06:58

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • % Done changed from 0 to 10

Implemented, passes the upstream test suite. I’ll now run this through the Tails test suite.

#12 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-01 10:07:07

  • Target version changed from Tails_3.6 to Tails_3.7

#13 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-01 10:09:59

  • Feature Branch changed from persistence-setup:feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features to persistence-setup:feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features, feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features

#14 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-02 15:10:56

  • Feature Branch changed from persistence-setup:feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features, feature/15280-15275-rework-persistence-features to persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui

#15 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-02 15:11:26

intrigeri wrote:
> I’ll now run this through the Tails test suite.

Passes!

#16 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-02 15:11:50

  • % Done changed from 10 to 50

#17 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-03 10:23:44

  • Feature Branch changed from persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui to perl5lib:feature/14594-asp-gui, persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui

#18 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-05 10:25:25

  • Feature Branch changed from perl5lib:feature/14594-asp-gui, persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui to perl5lib:feature/14594-asp-gui, iuk:feature/14594-asp-gui, persistence-setup:feature/14594-asp-gui, feature/14594-asp-gui

#19 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-06 15:07:10

  • blocked by Feature #14595: Code for Additional Software Packages GUI: Persistence Setup added

#20 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-06 15:08:21

  • % Done changed from 50 to 90

FTR this will be done when Feature #14595 and friends are merged into devel, which should happen late June / early July.

#21 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-22 09:52:23

  • blocks deleted (Feature #14595: Code for Additional Software Packages GUI: Persistence Setup)

#22 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-22 09:52:32

#23 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-22 09:53:25

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • Target version changed from Tails_3.7 to Tails_3.9
  • % Done changed from 90 to 100

Let’s treat this any other subtask of Feature #14595.

#24 Updated by intrigeri 2018-03-22 09:53:50

#25 Updated by intrigeri 2019-05-14 12:46:07

  • related to Feature #16718: Consider adding back a Persistence feature for GNOME keyring added