11–20 of 212 posts
How does this compare to other popular solutions? Specifically, KeepassX / Keepass2 which are the most common solutions I've seen most Unix / Linux users employ. Can we objectively state which one is a better solution?
- There's no builtin GUI
- Each entry is its own file
- You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords)
- It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
How does this compare to other popular solutions? Specifically, KeepassX / Keepass2 which are the most common solutions I've seen most Unix / Linux users employ. Can we objectively state which one is a better solution?
A few differences: - There's no builtin GUI - Each entry is its own file - You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords) - It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
https://github.com/carnager/rofi-pass/
Gets me really close to the holy grail of password managers. Browser integration is possible too with PassFF:
How does this compare to other popular solutions? Specifically, KeepassX / Keepass2 which are the most common solutions I've seen most Unix / Linux users employ. Can we objectively state which one is a better solution?
A few differences: - There's no builtin GUI - Each entry is its own file - You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords) - It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
If it becomes standard, people would use it without a master password, and then stealing passwords via malicious scripts will become very easy.
How does this compare to other popular solutions? Specifically, KeepassX / Keepass2 which are the most common solutions I've seen most Unix / Linux users employ. Can we objectively state which one is a better solution?
A few differences: - There's no builtin GUI - Each entry is its own file - You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords) - It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
pass -c (or --clip) does that for you.
How does this compare to other popular solutions? Specifically, KeepassX / Keepass2 which are the most common solutions I've seen most Unix / Linux users employ. Can we objectively state which one is a better solution?
A few differences: - There's no builtin GUI - Each entry is its own file - You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords) - It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
Wrong, pass provides the -c flag which puts it in your clipboard and clears it after a timeout.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few differences: - There's no builtin GUI - Each entry is its own file - You control the storage format (meaning it's easy to store any kind of information, not just passwords) - It relies on GPG, so you need to set that up first
>- You need to handle X integration yourself by piping to xclip, or similar (or just cut and pasting from terminal) Wrong, pass provides the -c flag which puts it in your clipboard and clears it after a timeout.
Pass is pretty awesome, but nowadays I've switched to gopass: https://github.com/justwatchcom/gopass - much better support for teams, structured secrets, binary secrets and quite a few other improvements. Oh, and it's (mostly) drop-in compatible.