• Debian 11 is approaching its end-of-life (vendor EOL date - August 31, 2026). Plesk Obsidian 18.0.80 will be the last release to support it.
    If you are running Plesk Obsidian on Debian 11, we recommend you upgrade those servers to Debian 12 using our dist-upgrade tool.
  • We plan to deprecate and remove the support for XML RPC protocol versions earlier than 1.6.9.1 in Plesk Obsidian 18.0.82. We strongly recommend that you update all existing integrations using earlier versions of the XML RPC protocol to comply with the version 1.6.9.1 specification.

Question EULA update after upgrading to 18.0.79 – some questions

Azurel

Silver Pleskian
Server operating system version
AlmaLinux 8.10
Plesk version and microupdate number
Plesk Obsidian 18.0.79#2
After updating from Plesk Obsidian 18.0.78 to 18.0.79, I was presented with an "EULA Update" immediately after logging in. I have a few questions regarding this process:
  1. Shouldn't a EULA update be communicated before installing the update?
    Version 18.0.78 did not mention that accepting a new EULA would be required. Once the update is installed, administrators are effectively presented with a take-it-or-leave-it situation, since rolling back is generally not a practical option.

  2. Why doesn't the updated EULA include a revision date or version number?
    Without any visible versioning or effective date, it is difficult to determine whether this is actually a new agreement or to reference it in the future.
    I noticed that the EULA published on the Plesk Legal website Legal - Plesk is labelled "Plesk Product EULA v.10 – 25.03.2026", so versioning clearly exists.
    However, the EULA presented in Plesk itself does not show any version number or revision date, making it impossible to know which version is being accepted.
    In addition, I could not find any archive of previous versions (for example, v.9) or any summary of what has changed between versions. Without either a previous version or a change log, administrators have no practical way to review the legal changes before accepting the updated agreement.

  3. Wouldn't it be more user-friendly to provide a summary of the changes?
    The EULA is over 80,000 characters long. A simple changelog or a "What's changed since the previous version" summary would make the process much more transparent.
I fully understand that legal terms sometimes need to change. My concern is not that there is an updated EULA, but rather how the change is communicated to administrators. Better transparency before the update and a clear summary of the changes would make the process much easier to understand and accept.
 
Thank you for your feedback, @Azurel . Our team will align with the legal department and consider revising the in-panel End-User Legal Agreement update distribution process in the future.
 
Back
Top