(no title)
enkrs | 5 months ago
I used pass for a while but couldn’t see what threat model it actually solves:
If you let GPG agent cache your key, any script (e.g. an npm post-install) can just run `pass ls` or `pass my/secrets` and dump all your credentials. At that point it’s basically just full-disk encryption with extra steps—might as well keep everything in ~/passwords.txt.
If you don’t cache the key, you’re forced to type your long GPG password every single time you need a secret.
I tried a YubiKey for on-demand unlocking, but the integration is clunky and plugging it in constantly is a pain if you need passwords multiple times per hour.
I eventually switched to Bitwarden.
aborsy|5 months ago
In fact, with Bitwarden, the cached password is exposed to the browser that has a large attack surface (including interacting with random remote servers). There was just a vulnerability in most browser based password managers including Bitwarden that would allow a remote attacker trick a user send out their passwords.
I use Bitwarden but mostly for non-critical passwords.
trinsic2|5 months ago
I like the idea of storing password data in individual encrypted files and using git to store changes, but I wonder if it creates more friction to retrive the information. I havent tried this solution yet. I will when I get more time. It seems like this solution would benefit from a more standardized specification for storing and retrieving information. I known its not every persons cup of tea, but maybe some kind of separated add-on for streamlining this process could be beneficial.
charcircuit|5 months ago
Modern operating systems isolate individual apps such that a malicous app can not access the RAM of another app. There is a difference between not making an effort to protect passwords and requiring an OS exploit to do so.
puffybuf|5 months ago
You can also just encrypt your passwords into individual encrypted files (one for each password) and have your script clear the gpg agent after a passfile is decrypted.
kenmacd|5 months ago
Even if someone/malware was to steal my yubikey pin they'd still need to convince me to tap the thing over 1,000 times to steal all my passwords.
wkat4242|5 months ago
The good thing also is that unlike with fido2 you only have to enter the pin once for OpenPGP. Then it stays unlocked while it's plugged in. But still needs the physical touch for every password. Perfect and convenient for me.
It also works great on mobile with openkeychain and password store. Both are not really maintained now but I don't really care because the encryption is in hardware anyway (yubikey over nfc)
justusthane|5 months ago
You might already be aware of this, but Bitwarden also has a CLI client that can be used for this purpose, at least casually.
ggiesen|5 months ago
komali2|5 months ago
eptcyka|5 months ago
My main issue with pass is that it doesn’t work great on iOS with yubikeys.
froddd|5 months ago
yehoshuapw|5 months ago
hkt|5 months ago