Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.unix.misc,comp.misc Subject: Re: Do you use a password manager? Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 13:48:14 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 35 Message-ID: <87v95f45td.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <874kcz5pqn.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <87zgur47bv.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <120720211627013354%nospam@nospam.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="d99a2aa5e30c72b9011dead7e6361f9f"; logging-data="27646"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ra4H8RnwTkEDG4bMnnpAd" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:YKNUC9LuabT8k3a/eNxzZhtLdIo= sha1:9WyGbth3ZxcwgqihMXrLdlGqp8Q= Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:137226 comp.sys.mac.misc:8046 comp.unix.misc:281 comp.misc:21061 nospam writes: > In article <87zgur47bv.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>, Keith Thompson > wrote: >> >> Keeping the database synchronized across devices is left as an exercise. >> > >> > And that means you end up with not having the password you need unless >> > you limit your use of the Internet to a single machine. >> >> Not if I replicate the encrypted database across the machines I use. >> I understand that that could open a potential security hole if >> I'm not sufficiently careful. But if I *am* sufficiently careful, >> my database doesn't exist on anyone else's server. > > and if you forget to sync it, murphy's law states that you won't have > the password you need. Of course. That happens now and then. The solution is to go back and sync it. > computers are there to do work *for* you. I'm not going to go into too much detail about *how* I synchronize my password database. I'm not confident that my method is sufficiently secure. (Yes, I'm doing "security through obscurity", but only as a layer on top of other methods.) I'm comfortable with the amount of manual work my method requires. Others won't be. But what do you suggest? -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Philips void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */