top | item 46449229

(no title)

imgopaal | 2 months ago

Thank you to everyone who took the time to review QuickClip and give honest feedback. I spent the day going through everything and fixing the issues that were pointed out, especially around security.

You were right. The concerns were valid, and they’re now addressed.

1. Shared encryption key (Retr0id's main issue): Problem: All users shared one encryption key, so any user could decrypt any other user's data. Fix: Each user now has a unique encryption key derived via PBKDF2 from master key + user ID (10,000 iterations). Old items encrypted with the shared key are detected during decryption and automatically re-encrypted in the background with the new per-user key. Backward compatibility is maintained during the migration.

2. Public image access (Retr0id's second issue): Problem: Images were publicly accessible without authentication. Fix: Images now use signed URLs that expire after 1 year. The app automatically converts any public URLs to signed URLs. Storage bucket policies restrict access to user-specific folders.

3. Storage enumeration (foltik's issue): Problem: Could enumerate all user uploads with a sign-up token. Fix: Storage policies now restrict folder access by user ID. Still reviewing listing permissions to prevent enumeration.

4. E2EE misrepresentation: Problem: Marketing claimed "end-to-end encrypted" but it wasn't true E2EE. Fix: Added a /data-security page that explains: It's server-side encryption with per-user keys, not true E2EE Why server-side encryption was chosen (seamless cross-device sync)

5. Transparency issues: Problem: No information about how data is handled before signup. Fix: Added /data-security page with details. Link added to footer. Removed the footer joke that hurt trust.

6. Other fixes: Rate limits adjusted for encryption/decryption operations Background re-encryption for old items Proactive signed URL conversion for images What's still being worked on: Storage bucket listing permissions (enumeration prevention) Adding screenshots to landing page FAQ section Considering open source (evaluating) I appreciate the security review. The app is more secure now, and I'm committed to transparency about what it does and doesn't do. Check /data-security for the full explanation.

discuss

order

Closi|2 months ago

I think the challenge is that you are potentially storing some of the most secret things for users here - passwords copied from password managers, bank details copied and pasted into forms, private photos, corporate secrets and designs, medical records... And even your revised model shows a completely careless approach to security and is entirely insufficient considering the data stored.

Encrypting images is too slow too? Poor excuse - it probably takes milliseconds. If you are asking people to trust them with their nudes and photos of bank documents, you need to store them in a way that you can’t see them.

You having access to all user data stored with a tiny privacy policy that basically boils down to “we can use your data as long as it’s not illegal for us to use it” is not sufficient!

I wouldn’t be this harsh on the security of another startup or app just because most startups don’t start asking users to store their secrets with them - because you will be storing secrets, that puts you into a category of people who need to be careful and not careless - at the moment you are demonstrating the latter.

It’s entirely possible to do everything end to end by the way (imo this is the only way this should be done considering you will be storing passwords) - see how 1password does it and copy them if nothing else: https://1password.com/files/1password-white-paper.pdf

imgopaal|2 months ago

Hi, I'm a solo developer trying to build and learn new things along the way, and I appreciate your responses, about the QuickClip, I've been making some improvments along the way also I've updated my landing page about how we manage data and how users should not add their senstive data and it should be just used for moving your usual stuff, I've removed all the writings where I was mentioning that we're using "e2ee", its mentioned much more clearly that how we handle your data in the FAQs. Kindly have a look at the quickclip.space again. Let me know what you think

fc417fc802|2 months ago

PBKDF2 is outdated. You should be using Argon2.

But, why use a key stretching algorithm for this particular scheme to begin with? What is it protecting against here? The master key is presumably high entropy. If someone gains access to the master key and breaks into your server a key stretching algorithm isn't going to help you.

Lots of secrets get sent through the clipboard. Anything handling it either needs to be strictly local or E2EE. Otherwise everything is vulnerable if someone breaks into the server. It's also accessible by you at will regardless of any promises you might make to the contrary.

Seamless cross device sync isn't an excuse. E2EE itself doesn't impede that whatsoever, only certain protocol choices that aren't (or at least don't need to be) relevant here.

Closi|1 month ago

100% agree - If this app gets any traction at all, it's only a matter of time before someone's crypto wallet gets leaked and emptied.

If you want to be handling peoples secrets, you have to make sure you know what you are doing and build something bombproof (bombproof from a mathematical perspective, rather than relying on your server being secure)