I guess now is as good a time as any for them to start using a proper password manager.
Personally, I recommend Keepass - it has multiple clients for all platforms, and you can keep the file in sync with a program of your own choosing, like Dropbox, syncthing or whatever you like.
Bitwarden is probably a more pragmatic choice for most users, given that it's free and without having to manage the syncing yourself.
Any password manager is better than the alternative, though.
I'm not sure what you're comparing it to. Keepass is free too, in fact it's open source. In my opinion, local software and database that is under your control is always superior to cloud.
Keepass over Bitwarden offers a lot of plugins and integrations, again, if you want more customization or automation.
But, I would say you can use any online password manager as long as it's end to end encrypted, so Bitwarden is a good choice.
I think your bias may be showing. The average computer user doesn’t even think about using a password manager. It just exists and works in their browser.
Also, local software and database is always superior to cloud.
Now there's an unfounded blanket statement if I ever saw one.
Statement related to previous cloud hacks i assume.
Should have say: self-hosting is always superior to cloud hosting.
Bitwarden (the client) + Vaultwarden (the self-hosted server) is a good combo if you have some knowledge on how to setup it.
Should have say: self-hosting is always superior to cloud hosting.
That statement still comes with a pretty damn big caveat though - you need to have the know-how, the time to invest and the hardware (i.e money) to actually set something like this up.
If all of those are true, then self-hosting can definitely be an attractive option for you.
It's only true for a vanishingly small fraction of the population, though.
Hence, Bitwarden is a pragmatic solution that will be superior for the vast majority of the population.
No dislike for Keepass here, but I prefer Bitwarden. It's also super easy to self host with Vaultwarden.
Keepass XC on PC, Keepass DX on Android, Syncthing to sync database
Works flawlessly!
Most amazingly, this setup is also unexpectedly resilient against merge conflicts and can sync even when two copies have changed. You wouldn't expect that from tools relying on 3rd party file syncing.
I still try to avoid it, but every time it accidentally happened, I could just merge the changes automatically without losing data.
How did you enable merge conflict resolution for KeePassXC databases?
Depends a bit on the clients.
KeePass: Will ask you if you want to synchronize/overwrite/discard the database when saving.
KeePassXC: Will autoreload the database in the background, so merge conflicts shouldn't happen in the first place. Otherwise there's 'Merge database' in the menu.
KeePass2Android: So I mixed up the names and this is the client I actually use. This one does all changes to an internal copy of the database that is then synchronized on request.
KeePassDX: As far as I can see it also has a mechanism similar too KeePass2Android.
Assuming you only have one desktop and mobile client you should never run into any issues. If you do have multiple KeePassXC clients it's all fine as well assuming Syncthing always has another client it can sync with.
Ah, I can do it inside the client, thank you!
By ignoring the conflict files
I store my DB in Dropbox and use KeePass2Android on phone which has built in Dropbox sync.
Yeah but then you have to trust Dropbox
And I do, have used it for 10+ years I think. Keyfile is also used so even with leaked DB file and password, it should be inaccessible.
Vaultwarden ftw
Exactly! Self hosted FTW. Chances of a data breach.... Typically pretty minor if you are smart.
Chances of losing the data is higher with selfhosting too. Unless you’re doing some sort of multizone replication, or course.
I use syncthing so there's a copy of my password database on each of my devices.
I would rather lose my passwords than have my password database be accessed by someone else. Most websites have a "forgot password" function, and for passwords that don't have that (e.g. to decrypt my hard drive or log into my computer) I've memorised the passphrase and always type it manually anyway. And for passwords where neither applies, it's probably not a huge loss anyway if I've not prepared for the possibility of losing my password db for that particular password.
Yeah. Daily and weekly cloud backups solve that for myself for sure.
I am hosting on Home Assistant which itself gets a backup to my Google drive and my personal machine. So there are two backups, as long as HA doesn't create a corrupted backup 3 weeks in a row I am good.
Borg backup to borgbase is not very expensive and borg will encrypt the data plus the vault is also encrypted
As long as you're still signed into BW from any of your devices, you can always export the vault from there.
(But yes, actual backups are always a plus)
Keep vaultwarden behind wireguard for local only access then also use https certs and good master password. Very secure like this
Why https if the traffic is already encrypted by the vpn?
Security in layers.
All your services should be using https. Vaultwarden in particular won't even run without https unless you bypass a bunch of security measures.
This is how to setup local only and external https, I highly recommend this as a baseline setup for every homelab. It allows you to choose how much security you want on a per app basis and makes adding new apps trivially easy.
+1 for a self-hosted Vaultwarden instance. If you’re technically capable and have extra hardware laying around this is the best way to go.
Although a backup is still required or you are gambling on hardware outliving your need for your data.
100%. Make sure to follow the 3-2-1 backup rule with all things you do.
Anyone with the knowledge to self host will quickly discover 3-2-1. If they choose to follow it, that's on them but data loss won't be from ignorance
Shoutouts to paper and pen.
Keep the booklet in a safe place.
If you never, ever need your passwords outside of your home, that's great advice - it's as secure as can be against digital theft. Less so against fire though, and backups are out of the question.
I just store all my passwords in robots.txt on my web server, makes it easy for me to access them anywhere I go...
/s
Backups are easy? Just copy to another piece of paper and store somewhere else.
I'm just being facetious though.
I'm not being facetious though. Off-site backups of a digital password collection are easy to setup and maintain. But when you change your password or add a new entry, it's going to be a pain in the ass to have to drive over and update a physical copy.
If you can live with those downsides, that's fine. But in my opinion it would be facetious to pretend a physical backup is "just as good/usable" as a digital one.
-edit: whoops, misread that as implying that I was being facetious. As you were sir -
I have a firesafe at home for important papers, passports and some emergency cash. I keep my passwords there.
You can have backups of physical books. Just copy the text from one to the other. Yeah it is manual work but so is writing the first one in the first place. You can then store the second copy in a fire resistant safe or at a friends or family members house (maybe inside a safe as well).
Well you can write a copy and keep it in a shed if it's unlikely to also catch fire.
Typically, the drawer just below the keyboard (in my experience)
If it's my mother, post it notes stuck to the laptop...
Hopefully someone in the house is supposed to be there, or they just take the TV.
This is the first suggestion here that's actually within the technical abilities of most people, even most Lemmy users.
The level of technical knowledge some of people here seem to think the general public has is absurd.
I'm usually the one promoting technical literacy to all but in this case I honestly don't use a password manager.
It's honestly seemed like more trouble than it's worth, there's a few websites where I just reset my password every time.
The thing that makes it worth it to me is long, randomly generated passwords that I don't have to know.
None of the sites and services I use require me to type out a password thanks to browser integration and auto type (for desktop apps and such), along with autofill service on android.
Then along with that I can even store other things like account recovery codes (for 2fa) or security questions (which also get randomly generated answers)... It's a handy thing to have IMHO
If getting a Dropbox account is too difficult for them, I seriously wonder why they'd be subscribed here, or reading articles about password management in browsers.
We're lost
Because I'm interested in tech news, especially since the world we live in can't function without it.
Besides, Lemmy seems to seriously overestimate the technical abilities of, well, most people.
Never trust your credentials to a private company, they could be bought out by state actors.
Never trust your credentials to yourself, you can be bought out by beer, poor decisions, and tripping over the cables connected to your home server you cobbled together.
The xz compromise having demonstrated that FOSS projects are totally immune to interference from state actors...
Right that’s why you shouldn’t trust those either
I put all my passwords in a text document, then print it on a little strip of paper and shove it up my ass. Whenever I take a crap, I dig it out from the turds and try to memorise some of them again. Then I shove it back up there where noone else can find my data and I won't lose it.
Ah yes, KeepAss
Spectacular
I'm scared of downloading after that Mexican party
sh.itjust.works
Forgot to mention I delete the text document and set fire to the computer's hard drive. The passwords are only ever in my ass, with the rest of my personal shit.
Following up your own shit post with another shit post is shit post gold.
This tracks very close to my idea of the suppository flask stick.
Have you ever tried anal, my beautiful gentleman?
Sounds like a security risk.
Maybe, but it would have to be personal and in my ass if I had or ever did.
Bitwarden here. Works well.
No $10 gift card?
Lame.
"Chrome users" or "Chrome under windows users" would be closer to the truth.
Still, quite a screw up.
Something like 2/3rds of the world uses chrome for desktop. I'd bet that number is higher for windows specifically. If you're the rare person who doesn't use chrome then you're savy enough to know this doesn't apply to you
No-one should be using any password manager built into any browser, neither Chromium-based nor Firefox-based. Browser password databases are almost trivially easy for malware to harvest.
Go with something external, BitWarden or 1Password, or if you are entirely within the Apple ecosystem their new password system built into iOS 18 is apparently really good.
Go with something external, BitWarden or 1Password,
When it comes to security software, I usually recommend sticking to open-source solutions, which is why I'd recommend Bitwarden over 1Password. Their whole stack (backend, frontend, and native apps) is all open-source. A premium account is well worth the $10/year.
You can self-host their server, or self-host Vaultwarden which is an unofficial API-compatible reimplementation of the Bitwarden backend designed to be lighter weight. Note that Vaultwarden is unofficial and hasn't gone through the same security audits as Bitwarden has. It's a good piece of software though.
Use ButWarden myself for a login-only subset of my KeePass content. I absolutely recommend it every chance I get, but some people prefer 1Password because reasons. And 1Password is pretty much the best closed-source option out there, which is why I do so… anything to give people options that keep them away from clusterf**ks like LastPass.
I migrated from Bitwarden to 1password because I wanted something that works better on Linux. With 1password-cli and PAM integration mainly. Bitwarden worked beautifully under Windows, but once I switched over to Linux, I realised that 1password had more Linux friendly features. I track some discussions over bitwarden that talk about implementing those features, I might come back at some point.
Definitely true... Using 1Password is still better than reusing the same password for every site. I've never used it but it gets a lot of good feedback, especially from Mac users.
The only problems I've had with 1password are usually not 1password's fault. Like needing to log into something that opened through the Gmail's app's built in browser that closed the page when the app loses focus.
I wish there was a way to link passwords and have note fields that are hidden by default. I've got a lot of stuff at work that is linked to my LDAP password but for various reasons uses different usernames on different sites. It'd be nice if there was a way to tell it "I know this password is reused, I promise it's okay"
I use Keepass. Free, secure, great.
That's what I used before 1password. The UI is a bit finicky but it works great. Plus you can shove it into DropBox or other various cloud sync things to get a "cloud" version lol.
I have that as an offline DB. Holds 100% of all creds that can go offline (no 2FA, unfortunately) and a bunch of extra stuff that most other managers aren’t flexible enough to do.
What makes the built-in database easier to attack than a separate one?
What makes the built-in database easier to attack than a separate one?
For performance reasons, early versions weren’t even encrypted, and later versions were encrypted with easily-cracked encryption. Most malware broke the encryption on the password DB using the user’s own hardware resources before it was even uploaded to the mothership. And not everyone has skookum GPUs, so that bit was particularly damning.
Plus, the built-in password managers operated within the context of the browser to do things like auto-fill, which meant only the browser needed to be compromised in order to expose the password DB.
Modern password managers like BitWarden can be configured with truly crazy levels of encryption, such that it would be very difficult for even nation-states to break into a backed-up or offline vault.
It's protected by the user's login password. If an attacker can steal that or knows it already, the passwords are all there for them to see.
Bitwarden (on the other hand, for example) has 2FA options to unlock the database.
Oh, so you mean local vs external, not browser-based vs other local solutions.
How does this work if accessing Bitwarden via the browser extension? I don't like needing to type my master password in all the time as it's long, so I have the setting turned on that times the vault out periodically, but so it's also unlockable with a pin rather than requiring the master password every time. I understand the pin is shorter, but does the protection of the vault still stand?
That's a good question. I don't actually know the answer to that. I know the passwords are hashed locally when your vault is locked and before being synced, but I'm not sure whether it's in plaintext when it's unlocked or if it uses some kind of on-demand decryption. It's probably in their docs, I should think.
"Here's what you need to know" - Avoid anything Google.
And backup your password vault
Keepass has been working with no issues
All of them are vulnerable to bugs though. Just a matter of luck.
Which bugs breaks Keepass encryption?
One of the mobile clients corrupted all passwords for me. I ended up losing only 2 passwords, and only 1 I wasn't able to restore. Good lesson on why backups are important though :)
One of the reasons i use Mega to sync my keepass db across devices where it's needed. They have version control, so if it gets corrupted then i can restore from a previous version
If he knew, do you think he'd be wasting time talking here about it instead of, I don't know, ransoming millions of user passwords?
I like to think that most people would just contact the devs privately to get a fix pushed asap instead of ransoming everyone's passwords.
Right, but my point was that there aren't public bugs in encryption algorithms just hanging around. Asking for those is categorically bad faith.
Recently started using Bitwarden and it works really well. You can even ditch authenticator because it has OTP built in too.
I selfhost it though because I trust nobody with this type of sensitive data, encrypted or not.
By storing your passwords and otp in the same place it becomes 1 factor authentification
Not really as you're still protected from password breaches, which is most likely to happen anyways, especially if you self host.
If you're actively being targeted for your bitwarden password, you likely have bigger problems
Not if you use 2 factor to access the password manager.
It's still just one factor. You just secured it better.
To set a scene, you awake in the middle of the night because your phone is making noise. Blearily you unlock it, glance at a prompt, and then approve a login and fall back asleep. The intruder now has access to your password manager!
They attempt to log into your bank and drain your life savings, but despite having your password it sends another prompt to your phone. This time, you wake up enough to realize something is wrong. This time, you deny the prompt.
The entire second paragraph cannot happen if your MFA is a single factor. Don't store MFA in your password manager!
If your MFA is stored in your password manager, you're not getting prompts to your phone about it. You're just prompted for a otp code that you have to go out of your way to copy/paste or type in from the manager.
I mean yeah it’s less secure than if they were separated. But my mom is never going to use a separate app for passwords and 2FA, so the two in one app is still better than nothing.
Blearily you unlock it, glance at a prompt, and then approve a login and fall back asleep.
The idea that people would approve that is wild to me.
Mate, I've had users who were sharing an account that only some of them had MFA prompts for. They didn't bother checking who had initiated the prompt, they just approved it because it was easier. And that was while they were fully awake and thinking...
What's funny to me is that doing this while you know your target is asleep probably has a higher success rate just because they're more likely to press the wrong thing just because their eyes are groggy. I can read my phone without my glasses but when I wake up in the night that's not the case right away.
Bruh, if my phone is sending me notifications in the middle of the night, the first thing I'm doing is uninstalling whatever app is sending me notifications.
If people are that gullible to fall prey to an attack like this, managing OTP in two apps is probably more than they can handle anyway. Everybody has a different threat model, and it's okay if it's not covered by hardware passkeys and locally hashed and managed databases.
Technically yes if my vault gets compromised I would be fucked. I have it firewalled tho and only accessible from home (or VPN to home). So should be pretty secure. I used google authenticator but found it a major pita (can't even search entries on Android, wtf?). If they make this more user friendly I'll gladly switch back to a seperate OTP store.
so no more authy?
BITWARDEN HAS THAT BUILT IN???? thats AWESOME
So does keepass
Yep, and Vaultwarden too!
Though the most secure practice is to store them separately.
Alr
The most secure practice for any high-value accounts (email etc) is to use WebAuthn with a hardware key like a Yubikey.
TOTP is still vulnerable to phishing (a fake login page can ask for both a password and a TOTP code) so business/corporate environments are moving away from them.
Sure, hardware keys are superior!
I'm only talking about best practtices when using TOTPs in particular.
It is a paid feature though if you don't selfhost
The paid features aren't free if you self-host either. You still need a premium account to use premium features with a self-hosted Bitwarden, unless you modify the code and remove the licensing checks. Licenses are pretty cheap though.
The major features are free if you use Vaultwarden, which is an alternative server implementation.
Oh
But it's cheap! $10 a YEAR when I last checked.
alr
Yep, for only $10 per year. But just make sure to keep backups of your vault and/or make an emergency kit.
Alr
I was thinking about self hosting but I was worried it would be less secure. I don't really know a lot about setting that kind of thing up (I do have programming experience but don't have a lot of server hosting experience outside of doing it for games like Minecraft) and I feel like I'd mess it up and it would be a lot easier to get into than a hardened server. Especially cause the odds I get a virus or something is probably higher then the odds someone breaks into bitwarden's server. Idk if I'm wrong about this, would love to be corrected if I am, was just my initial thoughts when I switched over from a different password manager to bitwarden.
If you don’t trust yourself 110%, don’t host it yourself. Too risky. I self-host everything, but I leave email and passwords to someone else because it’s just too important.
I think the bigger thing to worry about is, what would happen if your server fails or is destroyed? Would you have a backup of all your passwords? And if yes, are those backups updated regularly and stored in a safe place that also won't get destroyed if the server gets destroyed (like, say, a house fire)?
Then, yes, you got the cybersecurity angle too
It's a lot to think about for something as important and fundamental to everything you do on the internet as passwords (and accounts)
backups aren't that big of a deal with bitwarden as every client keeps a copy of the database that can be restored.
It's pretty easy to setup using docker, you do need to know that ofcourse and how to setup dns and stuff.
I have it firewalled so my vault is not accessible from the internet, only from home or vpn to home.
And it can also store passkeys to effortlessly sync between desktop/Android/iOS
A friend has a notebook next to her computer with all her passwords in it. Initially I was horrified - what if you're burgled? - but actually it's genius. Much more secure than letting a browser remember them, and she doesn't even need to memorise a Bitwarden password.
In a household it's probably not that bad. There aren't many people breaking into homes looking for account details.
I've had my identity stolen several times, and every single time it was stolen from a Fortune 500 company.
I just make all of my passwords password123 then I don't have to worry about memorizing them
*********** that’s what I see
Really? hunter2
Yeah, when you type hunter2, all I see is *******
Maybe they’re using one of those instances that censors things, lol
It's a primitive password manager, primitive because unencrypted and not integrated into your devices, but far better than not having a password manager.
Assuming the laptop is running bitlocker (often on by default), has a user password, and is offline, that's pretty decent.
Notebook refers to a paper notebook. Not a laptop.
And in which world is bitlocker on by default? Nope.
A world where we all go insane from explaining "we can't just 'hack' your bitlocker key" over and over to every older relative we have...
My mom told me that she was made fun of for having a book of hand written account credentials related to running her business (6 people total). I told her it was the best way to do it that wasn't massively overcomplicated for her situation and to keep it up. The only recommendation I made is that she use different long passwords for every site since she's already not memorizing them.
Personally I'm not convinced this isn't the best way unless you're being targeted by physical bad actors
Where is this book? In the office? I'd say that's absolutely horrible. If it's at home I think that's more okay.
Or maybe behind a keyed lock in the office? Not a keypad, a physical key.
Nah, most locks are really crappy.
Sure, if someone knows her physical address, knows how to disable the building alarm, knows what drawer she keeps the passwords locked in, and knows how to pick the lock, she could be in trouble. But that is a very targeted attack and if someone is that determined she's screwed anyway.
99.9% of attacks are the "low hanging fruit, protected from repercussions by not physically being there" kind.
Someone like an employee, janitor, or maintenance worker who has physical access to the building already is what I'm talking about. That's definitely a low hanging fruit type of attack. See your boss's passwords while your pissed off, snap a picture with your phone, fuck with them later.
What if the notebook gets destroyed or lost, though? That's my biggest concern here
feel like "aaand it's gone" would fit better here
Premium Bitwarden is so cheap and effective that I find it difficult to justify using an alternative.
Keepass with syncthing is completely free and doesn't rely on cloud hosting
Still. Back it up
Not a bad idea to back up to a json, but every computer you've used has a local encrypted copy you can export from using the app or extension.
Well sure... I have a local offline encrypted copy, rather than a whole separate password manager.
I self host my own Vaultwarden instance (a bitwarden server written in Rust) and it's more reliable than Google's password manager.
I use encfs and sync it to dropbox etc. Then use gopass password manager to store password in the encfs folders. Not fully auto-integrated but good enough for me.
No password manager is 100% safe. Make back-ups.
That's definitely a change from companies just leaving passwords around for anyone to find.
Me when I don't use Chrome, I don't use Windows, and I don't use browser password saving either
Switches to Proton Pass
I switched to Pass recently after having used Bitwarden for a couple years. I'd say Bitwarden still has a slight edge in terms of features, but Pass has gotten good enough and it's included in my Proton subscription.
Oh those government-suckers with proprietary servers. Good luck trusting your password to a shady entity
The server side literally doesn't matter. Even if it is FOSS they could do anything they please with it, other than reading it, because it's all encrypted. They could wipe all passwords if they so wanted.
They didn't vanish, it's just that now only Google has them.
I guess now is as good a time as any for them to start using a proper password manager.
Personally, I recommend Keepass - it has multiple clients for all platforms, and you can keep the file in sync with a program of your own choosing, like Dropbox, syncthing or whatever you like.
Bitwarden is probably a more pragmatic choice for most users, given that it's free and without having to manage the syncing yourself.
Any password manager is better than the alternative, though.
I'm not sure what you're comparing it to. Keepass is free too, in fact it's open source. In my opinion, local software and database that is under your control is always superior to cloud.
Keepass over Bitwarden offers a lot of plugins and integrations, again, if you want more customization or automation.
But, I would say you can use any online password manager as long as it's end to end encrypted, so Bitwarden is a good choice.
I think your bias may be showing. The average computer user doesn’t even think about using a password manager. It just exists and works in their browser.
Now there's an unfounded blanket statement if I ever saw one.
Statement related to previous cloud hacks i assume.
Should have say: self-hosting is always superior to cloud hosting.
Bitwarden (the client) + Vaultwarden (the self-hosted server) is a good combo if you have some knowledge on how to setup it.
That statement still comes with a pretty damn big caveat though - you need to have the know-how, the time to invest and the hardware (i.e money) to actually set something like this up.
If all of those are true, then self-hosting can definitely be an attractive option for you.
It's only true for a vanishingly small fraction of the population, though.
Hence, Bitwarden is a pragmatic solution that will be superior for the vast majority of the population.
No dislike for Keepass here, but I prefer Bitwarden. It's also super easy to self host with Vaultwarden.
Keepass XC on PC, Keepass DX on Android, Syncthing to sync database
Works flawlessly!
Most amazingly, this setup is also unexpectedly resilient against merge conflicts and can sync even when two copies have changed. You wouldn't expect that from tools relying on 3rd party file syncing.
I still try to avoid it, but every time it accidentally happened, I could just merge the changes automatically without losing data.
How did you enable merge conflict resolution for KeePassXC databases?
Depends a bit on the clients.
Assuming you only have one desktop and mobile client you should never run into any issues. If you do have multiple KeePassXC clients it's all fine as well assuming Syncthing always has another client it can sync with.
Ah, I can do it inside the client, thank you!
By ignoring the conflict files
I store my DB in Dropbox and use KeePass2Android on phone which has built in Dropbox sync.
Yeah but then you have to trust Dropbox
And I do, have used it for 10+ years I think. Keyfile is also used so even with leaked DB file and password, it should be inaccessible.
Vaultwarden ftw
Exactly! Self hosted FTW. Chances of a data breach.... Typically pretty minor if you are smart.
Chances of losing the data is higher with selfhosting too. Unless you’re doing some sort of multizone replication, or course.
I use syncthing so there's a copy of my password database on each of my devices.
I would rather lose my passwords than have my password database be accessed by someone else. Most websites have a "forgot password" function, and for passwords that don't have that (e.g. to decrypt my hard drive or log into my computer) I've memorised the passphrase and always type it manually anyway. And for passwords where neither applies, it's probably not a huge loss anyway if I've not prepared for the possibility of losing my password db for that particular password.
Yeah. Daily and weekly cloud backups solve that for myself for sure.
I am hosting on Home Assistant which itself gets a backup to my Google drive and my personal machine. So there are two backups, as long as HA doesn't create a corrupted backup 3 weeks in a row I am good.
Borg backup to borgbase is not very expensive and borg will encrypt the data plus the vault is also encrypted
As long as you're still signed into BW from any of your devices, you can always export the vault from there.
(But yes, actual backups are always a plus)
Keep vaultwarden behind wireguard for local only access then also use https certs and good master password. Very secure like this
Why https if the traffic is already encrypted by the vpn?
Security in layers.
All your services should be using https. Vaultwarden in particular won't even run without https unless you bypass a bunch of security measures.
This is how to setup local only and external https, I highly recommend this as a baseline setup for every homelab. It allows you to choose how much security you want on a per app basis and makes adding new apps trivially easy.
https://youtu.be/liV3c9m_OX8?si=TSWXoN_8SJDpAHaW
+1 for a self-hosted Vaultwarden instance. If you’re technically capable and have extra hardware laying around this is the best way to go.
Although a backup is still required or you are gambling on hardware outliving your need for your data.
100%. Make sure to follow the 3-2-1 backup rule with all things you do.
Anyone with the knowledge to self host will quickly discover 3-2-1. If they choose to follow it, that's on them but data loss won't be from ignorance
Shoutouts to paper and pen.
Keep the booklet in a safe place.
If you never, ever need your passwords outside of your home, that's great advice - it's as secure as can be against digital theft. Less so against fire though, and backups are out of the question.
I just store all my passwords in robots.txt on my web server, makes it easy for me to access them anywhere I go...
/s
Backups are easy? Just copy to another piece of paper and store somewhere else.
I'm just being facetious though.
I'm not being facetious though. Off-site backups of a digital password collection are easy to setup and maintain. But when you change your password or add a new entry, it's going to be a pain in the ass to have to drive over and update a physical copy.
If you can live with those downsides, that's fine. But in my opinion it would be facetious to pretend a physical backup is "just as good/usable" as a digital one.
-edit: whoops, misread that as implying that I was being facetious. As you were sir -
I have a firesafe at home for important papers, passports and some emergency cash. I keep my passwords there.
You can have backups of physical books. Just copy the text from one to the other. Yeah it is manual work but so is writing the first one in the first place. You can then store the second copy in a fire resistant safe or at a friends or family members house (maybe inside a safe as well).
Well you can write a copy and keep it in a shed if it's unlikely to also catch fire.
Typically, the drawer just below the keyboard (in my experience)
If it's my mother, post it notes stuck to the laptop...
Hopefully someone in the house is supposed to be there, or they just take the TV.
This is the first suggestion here that's actually within the technical abilities of most people, even most Lemmy users.
The level of technical knowledge some of people here seem to think the general public has is absurd.
I'm usually the one promoting technical literacy to all but in this case I honestly don't use a password manager.
It's honestly seemed like more trouble than it's worth, there's a few websites where I just reset my password every time.
The thing that makes it worth it to me is long, randomly generated passwords that I don't have to know.
None of the sites and services I use require me to type out a password thanks to browser integration and auto type (for desktop apps and such), along with autofill service on android.
Then along with that I can even store other things like account recovery codes (for 2fa) or security questions (which also get randomly generated answers)... It's a handy thing to have IMHO
If getting a Dropbox account is too difficult for them, I seriously wonder why they'd be subscribed here, or reading articles about password management in browsers.
We're lost
Because I'm interested in tech news, especially since the world we live in can't function without it.
Besides, Lemmy seems to seriously overestimate the technical abilities of, well, most people.
Never trust your credentials to a private company, they could be bought out by state actors.
Never trust your credentials to yourself, you can be bought out by beer, poor decisions, and tripping over the cables connected to your home server you cobbled together.
The xz compromise having demonstrated that FOSS projects are totally immune to interference from state actors...
Right that’s why you shouldn’t trust those either
I put all my passwords in a text document, then print it on a little strip of paper and shove it up my ass. Whenever I take a crap, I dig it out from the turds and try to memorise some of them again. Then I shove it back up there where noone else can find my data and I won't lose it.
Ah yes, KeepAss
Spectacular
I'm scared of downloading after that Mexican party
sh.itjust.works
Forgot to mention I delete the text document and set fire to the computer's hard drive. The passwords are only ever in my ass, with the rest of my personal shit.
Following up your own shit post with another shit post is shit post gold.
This tracks very close to my idea of the suppository flask stick.
Have you ever tried anal, my beautiful gentleman?
Sounds like a security risk.
Maybe, but it would have to be personal and in my ass if I had or ever did.
Bitwarden here. Works well.
No $10 gift card?
Lame.
"Chrome users" or "Chrome under windows users" would be closer to the truth. Still, quite a screw up.
Something like 2/3rds of the world uses chrome for desktop. I'd bet that number is higher for windows specifically. If you're the rare person who doesn't use chrome then you're savy enough to know this doesn't apply to you
No-one should be using any password manager built into any browser, neither Chromium-based nor Firefox-based. Browser password databases are almost trivially easy for malware to harvest.
Go with something external, BitWarden or 1Password, or if you are entirely within the Apple ecosystem their new password system built into iOS 18 is apparently really good.
When it comes to security software, I usually recommend sticking to open-source solutions, which is why I'd recommend Bitwarden over 1Password. Their whole stack (backend, frontend, and native apps) is all open-source. A premium account is well worth the $10/year.
You can self-host their server, or self-host Vaultwarden which is an unofficial API-compatible reimplementation of the Bitwarden backend designed to be lighter weight. Note that Vaultwarden is unofficial and hasn't gone through the same security audits as Bitwarden has. It's a good piece of software though.
Use ButWarden myself for a login-only subset of my KeePass content. I absolutely recommend it every chance I get, but some people prefer 1Password because reasons. And 1Password is pretty much the best closed-source option out there, which is why I do so… anything to give people options that keep them away from clusterf**ks like LastPass.
I migrated from Bitwarden to 1password because I wanted something that works better on Linux. With 1password-cli and PAM integration mainly. Bitwarden worked beautifully under Windows, but once I switched over to Linux, I realised that 1password had more Linux friendly features. I track some discussions over bitwarden that talk about implementing those features, I might come back at some point.
Definitely true... Using 1Password is still better than reusing the same password for every site. I've never used it but it gets a lot of good feedback, especially from Mac users.
The only problems I've had with 1password are usually not 1password's fault. Like needing to log into something that opened through the Gmail's app's built in browser that closed the page when the app loses focus.
I wish there was a way to link passwords and have note fields that are hidden by default. I've got a lot of stuff at work that is linked to my LDAP password but for various reasons uses different usernames on different sites. It'd be nice if there was a way to tell it "I know this password is reused, I promise it's okay"
I use Keepass. Free, secure, great.
That's what I used before 1password. The UI is a bit finicky but it works great. Plus you can shove it into DropBox or other various cloud sync things to get a "cloud" version lol.
I have that as an offline DB. Holds 100% of all creds that can go offline (no 2FA, unfortunately) and a bunch of extra stuff that most other managers aren’t flexible enough to do.
What makes the built-in database easier to attack than a separate one?
For performance reasons, early versions weren’t even encrypted, and later versions were encrypted with easily-cracked encryption. Most malware broke the encryption on the password DB using the user’s own hardware resources before it was even uploaded to the mothership. And not everyone has skookum GPUs, so that bit was particularly damning.
Plus, the built-in password managers operated within the context of the browser to do things like auto-fill, which meant only the browser needed to be compromised in order to expose the password DB.
Modern password managers like BitWarden can be configured with truly crazy levels of encryption, such that it would be very difficult for even nation-states to break into a backed-up or offline vault.
It's protected by the user's login password. If an attacker can steal that or knows it already, the passwords are all there for them to see.
Bitwarden (on the other hand, for example) has 2FA options to unlock the database.
Oh, so you mean local vs external, not browser-based vs other local solutions.
How does this work if accessing Bitwarden via the browser extension? I don't like needing to type my master password in all the time as it's long, so I have the setting turned on that times the vault out periodically, but so it's also unlockable with a pin rather than requiring the master password every time. I understand the pin is shorter, but does the protection of the vault still stand?
That's a good question. I don't actually know the answer to that. I know the passwords are hashed locally when your vault is locked and before being synced, but I'm not sure whether it's in plaintext when it's unlocked or if it uses some kind of on-demand decryption. It's probably in their docs, I should think.
"Here's what you need to know" - Avoid anything Google.
And backup your password vault
Keepass has been working with no issues
All of them are vulnerable to bugs though. Just a matter of luck.
Which bugs breaks Keepass encryption?
One of the mobile clients corrupted all passwords for me. I ended up losing only 2 passwords, and only 1 I wasn't able to restore. Good lesson on why backups are important though :)
One of the reasons i use Mega to sync my keepass db across devices where it's needed. They have version control, so if it gets corrupted then i can restore from a previous version
If he knew, do you think he'd be wasting time talking here about it instead of, I don't know, ransoming millions of user passwords?
I like to think that most people would just contact the devs privately to get a fix pushed asap instead of ransoming everyone's passwords.
Right, but my point was that there aren't public bugs in encryption algorithms just hanging around. Asking for those is categorically bad faith.
Recently started using Bitwarden and it works really well. You can even ditch authenticator because it has OTP built in too.
I selfhost it though because I trust nobody with this type of sensitive data, encrypted or not.
By storing your passwords and otp in the same place it becomes 1 factor authentification
Not really as you're still protected from password breaches, which is most likely to happen anyways, especially if you self host.
If you're actively being targeted for your bitwarden password, you likely have bigger problems
Not if you use 2 factor to access the password manager.
It's still just one factor. You just secured it better.
To set a scene, you awake in the middle of the night because your phone is making noise. Blearily you unlock it, glance at a prompt, and then approve a login and fall back asleep. The intruder now has access to your password manager!
They attempt to log into your bank and drain your life savings, but despite having your password it sends another prompt to your phone. This time, you wake up enough to realize something is wrong. This time, you deny the prompt.
The entire second paragraph cannot happen if your MFA is a single factor. Don't store MFA in your password manager!
If your MFA is stored in your password manager, you're not getting prompts to your phone about it. You're just prompted for a otp code that you have to go out of your way to copy/paste or type in from the manager.
I mean yeah it’s less secure than if they were separated. But my mom is never going to use a separate app for passwords and 2FA, so the two in one app is still better than nothing.
The idea that people would approve that is wild to me.
Mate, I've had users who were sharing an account that only some of them had MFA prompts for. They didn't bother checking who had initiated the prompt, they just approved it because it was easier. And that was while they were fully awake and thinking...
What's funny to me is that doing this while you know your target is asleep probably has a higher success rate just because they're more likely to press the wrong thing just because their eyes are groggy. I can read my phone without my glasses but when I wake up in the night that's not the case right away.
Bruh, if my phone is sending me notifications in the middle of the night, the first thing I'm doing is uninstalling whatever app is sending me notifications.
If people are that gullible to fall prey to an attack like this, managing OTP in two apps is probably more than they can handle anyway. Everybody has a different threat model, and it's okay if it's not covered by hardware passkeys and locally hashed and managed databases.
Technically yes if my vault gets compromised I would be fucked. I have it firewalled tho and only accessible from home (or VPN to home). So should be pretty secure. I used google authenticator but found it a major pita (can't even search entries on Android, wtf?). If they make this more user friendly I'll gladly switch back to a seperate OTP store.
I use aegis for the MFA portion.
Modern problems require modern solutions
so no more authy? BITWARDEN HAS THAT BUILT IN???? thats AWESOME
So does keepass
Yep, and Vaultwarden too!
Though the most secure practice is to store them separately.
Alr
The most secure practice for any high-value accounts (email etc) is to use WebAuthn with a hardware key like a Yubikey.
TOTP is still vulnerable to phishing (a fake login page can ask for both a password and a TOTP code) so business/corporate environments are moving away from them.
Sure, hardware keys are superior!
I'm only talking about best practtices when using TOTPs in particular.
It is a paid feature though if you don't selfhost
The paid features aren't free if you self-host either. You still need a premium account to use premium features with a self-hosted Bitwarden, unless you modify the code and remove the licensing checks. Licenses are pretty cheap though.
The major features are free if you use Vaultwarden, which is an alternative server implementation.
Oh
But it's cheap! $10 a YEAR when I last checked.
alr
Yep, for only $10 per year. But just make sure to keep backups of your vault and/or make an emergency kit.
Alr
I was thinking about self hosting but I was worried it would be less secure. I don't really know a lot about setting that kind of thing up (I do have programming experience but don't have a lot of server hosting experience outside of doing it for games like Minecraft) and I feel like I'd mess it up and it would be a lot easier to get into than a hardened server. Especially cause the odds I get a virus or something is probably higher then the odds someone breaks into bitwarden's server. Idk if I'm wrong about this, would love to be corrected if I am, was just my initial thoughts when I switched over from a different password manager to bitwarden.
If you don’t trust yourself 110%, don’t host it yourself. Too risky. I self-host everything, but I leave email and passwords to someone else because it’s just too important.
I think the bigger thing to worry about is, what would happen if your server fails or is destroyed? Would you have a backup of all your passwords? And if yes, are those backups updated regularly and stored in a safe place that also won't get destroyed if the server gets destroyed (like, say, a house fire)?
Then, yes, you got the cybersecurity angle too
It's a lot to think about for something as important and fundamental to everything you do on the internet as passwords (and accounts)
backups aren't that big of a deal with bitwarden as every client keeps a copy of the database that can be restored.
It's pretty easy to setup using docker, you do need to know that ofcourse and how to setup dns and stuff.
I have it firewalled so my vault is not accessible from the internet, only from home or vpn to home.
And it can also store passkeys to effortlessly sync between desktop/Android/iOS
A friend has a notebook next to her computer with all her passwords in it. Initially I was horrified - what if you're burgled? - but actually it's genius. Much more secure than letting a browser remember them, and she doesn't even need to memorise a Bitwarden password.
In a household it's probably not that bad. There aren't many people breaking into homes looking for account details.
I've had my identity stolen several times, and every single time it was stolen from a Fortune 500 company.
I just make all of my passwords password123 then I don't have to worry about memorizing them
*********** that’s what I see
Really? hunter2
Yeah, when you type hunter2, all I see is *******
Maybe they’re using one of those instances that censors things, lol
It's an ancient meme. https://web.archive.org/web/20040604194346/http://bash.org/?244321
Yeah, these newfangled password requirements ruined my life. I refuse to sign up for any website that doesn't let me use hunter2.
Ah, my girlfriend's approach. No matter how much I show her a pwned password or set her up on my Vaultwarden, she's not interested
Just add the same memorized bit to the end. Something simple like "123" would work. Even if the book is stolen it won't do them any good.
Kind of like salting.
This concept is also known as Double Blind Passwords or Horcruxing.
That's an excellent idea! I'll mention it to her.
It's a primitive password manager, primitive because unencrypted and not integrated into your devices, but far better than not having a password manager.
Assuming the laptop is running bitlocker (often on by default), has a user password, and is offline, that's pretty decent.
Notebook refers to a paper notebook. Not a laptop.
And in which world is bitlocker on by default? Nope.
A world where we all go insane from explaining "we can't just 'hack' your bitlocker key" over and over to every older relative we have...
This one
https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/windows-11-24h2-will-enable-bitlocker-encryption-for-everyone-happens-on-both-clean-installs-and-reinstalls
My mom told me that she was made fun of for having a book of hand written account credentials related to running her business (6 people total). I told her it was the best way to do it that wasn't massively overcomplicated for her situation and to keep it up. The only recommendation I made is that she use different long passwords for every site since she's already not memorizing them.
Personally I'm not convinced this isn't the best way unless you're being targeted by physical bad actors
Where is this book? In the office? I'd say that's absolutely horrible. If it's at home I think that's more okay.
Or maybe behind a keyed lock in the office? Not a keypad, a physical key.
Nah, most locks are really crappy.
Sure, if someone knows her physical address, knows how to disable the building alarm, knows what drawer she keeps the passwords locked in, and knows how to pick the lock, she could be in trouble. But that is a very targeted attack and if someone is that determined she's screwed anyway.
99.9% of attacks are the "low hanging fruit, protected from repercussions by not physically being there" kind.
Someone like an employee, janitor, or maintenance worker who has physical access to the building already is what I'm talking about. That's definitely a low hanging fruit type of attack. See your boss's passwords while your pissed off, snap a picture with your phone, fuck with them later.
What if the notebook gets destroyed or lost, though? That's my biggest concern here
feel like "aaand it's gone" would fit better here
Premium Bitwarden is so cheap and effective that I find it difficult to justify using an alternative.
Keepass with syncthing is completely free and doesn't rely on cloud hosting
Still. Back it up
Not a bad idea to back up to a json, but every computer you've used has a local encrypted copy you can export from using the app or extension.
Well sure... I have a local offline encrypted copy, rather than a whole separate password manager.
I self host my own Vaultwarden instance (a bitwarden server written in Rust) and it's more reliable than Google's password manager.
I use encfs and sync it to dropbox etc. Then use gopass password manager to store password in the encfs folders. Not fully auto-integrated but good enough for me.
No password manager is 100% safe. Make back-ups.
That's definitely a change from companies just leaving passwords around for anyone to find.
Me when I don't use Chrome, I don't use Windows, and I don't use browser password saving either
Switches to Proton Pass
I switched to Pass recently after having used Bitwarden for a couple years. I'd say Bitwarden still has a slight edge in terms of features, but Pass has gotten good enough and it's included in my Proton subscription.
Oh those government-suckers with proprietary servers. Good luck trusting your password to a shady entity
The server side literally doesn't matter. Even if it is FOSS they could do anything they please with it, other than reading it, because it's all encrypted. They could wipe all passwords if they so wanted.
They didn't vanish, it's just that now only Google has them.