GNOME's Shotwell 0.30 Is Organizing Flatpak Support, Theme Changes, Facial Recognition

[phoronix]

Phoronix: GNOME's Shotwell 0.30 Is Organizing Flatpak Support, Theme Changes, Facial Recognition

Those working on GNOME's Shotwell image/photo manager and organizer are baking a number of improvements and new features for the next release...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Shotwell-0.30-Features

[uid313]

I would have more need for sandboxing in a web browser, PDF viewer and media player than in a photo organizer.

[-MacNuke-]

I would have more need for sandboxing in a web browser, PDF viewer and media player than in a photo organizer.

Photos are not immune to security issues. And for example evince (PDF viewer), gnome-mpv (media player) and epiphany (browser) are on flathub too.

[Vistaus]

I would have more need for sandboxing in a web browser, PDF viewer and media player than in a photo organizer.

In that case you want gThumb. While it can't sandbox in a web browser, you can use it as a media player (it supports audio and video files) and it supports 3rd-party extensions, so you could easily write a PDF viewer extension.

[_blk]

You're missing the point here. Sandboxing in this case ensures you can run the latest version on a system that could otherwise not run the software without recompiling, and sometimes not even without changes. The picture collection is likely not in the sandbox anyway.

[woprandi]

GNOME Shotwell is like GNOME Photos, why continue to develop both ?

[Delgarde]

I would have more need for sandboxing in a web browser, PDF viewer and media player than in a photo organizer.

Are you sure? Consider, a feature of photo-organisers is the ability to publish photo galleries online... integration with Facebook and so forth (though the FB integration is currently broken due to API changes).

[uid313]

Are you sure? Consider, a feature of photo-organisers is the ability to publish photo galleries online... integration with Facebook and so forth (though the FB integration is currently broken due to API changes).

Yes.
Ability to publish photo galleries online is no problem as long as the software is open source, hence its trusted to do the right thing.
But a media player, PDF viewer or web browser could be exploited by the media to do malicious things.

[Delgarde]

Yes.
Ability to publish photo galleries online is no problem as long as the software is open source, hence its trusted to do the right thing.
But a media player, PDF viewer or web browser could be exploited by the media to do malicious things.

Of course, a photo-organiser that can publish to Facebook or Google needs to be able to log in to Facebook or Google... which means an embedded web browser for handling the login form...

[uid313]

Of course, a photo-organiser that can publish to Facebook or Google needs to be able to log in to Facebook or Google... which means an embedded web browser for handling the login form...

Good point. But the Facebook and Google login page served over HTTPS ought to reasonably secure.
I am more worried about maliciously crafted PDF and video files.