Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

KeePassXC 2.4.3

keepassxc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#31

Post by benoliver999 »

ufo wrote: post #28
alexnewman wrote: post #25

Why should I switch from pass (git+pgp) to keepassx ?What's one feature in keepassx nto in pass/passx

For me the biggest difference is that you have a single encrypted database file, and that no metadata is stored unencrypted. By default, pass uses file names as keys, so website names are stored in the clear. (To fix this on pass.you need to use pass-tomb, which I found very clunky, and could never get working quite right) Another thing I like about keepassxc is that it has lots of features. It comes with a flexible…

I agree about the metadata. I like pass but it's a flaw for sure. At least it's upfront about it.

Most other issues are covered with pass, like a good android app etc etc.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#32

Post by sebazzz »

mrrsm wrote: post #15
Jonnax wrote: post #7

I was only aware of Keepass itself. What are the differences between KeypassXC, KeepassX and Keepass?

KeePass is the original project. It is an open source dotnet application. The source code, as of the last time I checked, is released as a tar/zip with the binaries only. KeePassX is an open source c++ application. It was one of the cross platform applications to manage KeePass databases. It has not been under very active development for a while. KeePassXC is a fork of KeePassX which is under active developement. The…

Is KeePassXC also audited? The main KeePass has had multiple security audits, also thanks to the EU who funded it one time. Seems relevant for a password manager.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#33

Post by packet_nerd »

ufo wrote: post #30
ativzzz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you can store the database file in a shared drive (not sure that's proper security though)

That is secure as long as you have a good master password

KeePassXC works really well with Yubikey too. I use a Yubikey and a short pin for the password.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#34

Post by elagost »

benoliver999 wrote: post #31
ufo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me the biggest difference is that you have a single encrypted database file, and that no metadata is stored unencrypted. By default, pass uses file names as keys, so website names are stored in the clear. (To fix this on pass.you need to use pass-tomb, which I found very clunky, and could never get working quite right) Another thing I like about keepassxc is that it has lots of features. It comes with a flexible…

I agree about the metadata. I like pass but it's a flaw for sure. At least it's upfront about it. Most other issues are covered with pass, like a good android app etc etc.

You could always use pass-tomb, which is an extension that stores the entire tree encrypted.

https://github.com/roddhjav/pass-tomb#readme

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#35

Post by noisy_boy »

koolba wrote: post #23

Anybody know if they've fixed (or plan to fix) the sort by latest modification date of all records? That was the one missing feature from going from KeePassX to KeePassXC.

I am able to sort by latest modification date (not sure if thats what you meant).

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#37

Post by blattimwind »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #20
_red wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can elaborate more on the practical benefits of encrypted memory? Presumably this is mainly good for multi-user systems? On the average single-user system it seems that if you can already read memory there are 1000 other possible exploits that are cheaper / easier to perform (ie. keylog, screen capture, etc).

Crash reports often include memory dumps. Firefox automatically reports these to Mozilla - there's plenty of other software that auto-reports crash data as well. If that crash data includes in-memory credentials, that could lead to your master password being compromised.

> Crash reports often include memory dumps. Firefox automatically reports these to Mozilla

Of the process in question, not the entire system. A Firefox crash dump can potentially still include credentials and private keys, of course.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#38

Post by blattimwind »

vbezhenar wrote: post #8
ComodoHacker wrote: post #3

KeePassXC still lacks in-memory protection, so I stay with KeePass, with all its .NET troubles.

What troubles? I recently started to use it, and so far I did not encounter any troubles. For me the killer feature of KeePass is that it allows me to safely use it without typing master password using -pw-enc command line argument. I hated to type my password every day over and over again with 1Password. Especially because I understand that it's very weak protection if someone already break in my computer.

> without typing master password using -pw-enc command line argument

Process command lines are world-readable on various operating systems, so passing passwords over them is generally not a good idea.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#39

Post by vbezhenar »

blattimwind wrote: post #38
vbezhenar wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What troubles? I recently started to use it, and so far I did not encounter any troubles. For me the killer feature of KeePass is that it allows me to safely use it without typing master password using -pw-enc command line argument. I hated to type my password every day over and over again with 1Password. Especially because I understand that it's very weak protection if someone already break in my computer.

> without typing master password using -pw-enc command line argument Process command lines are world-readable on various operating systems, so passing passwords over them is generally not a good idea.

It's not a clear text password. It's encrypted with Windows user credentials. If someone just steals it, it won't be useful by itself.

Re: KeePassXC 2.4.3

#40

Post by packet_nerd »

mrrsm wrote: post #15
Jonnax wrote: post #7

I was only aware of Keepass itself. What are the differences between KeypassXC, KeepassX and Keepass?

KeePass is the original project. It is an open source dotnet application. The source code, as of the last time I checked, is released as a tar/zip with the binaries only. KeePassX is an open source c++ application. It was one of the cross platform applications to manage KeePass databases. It has not been under very active development for a while. KeePassXC is a fork of KeePassX which is under active developement. The…

KeePassXC is fantastic, I especially like the good Yubikey integration. The one small feature I miss from the original KeePass was the password templates. I like all my passwords to follow a grouped pattern so its easier to type into a phone or something while still being strong.
Post reply on HN