4 ms·

1Password unfortunately is still incompatible so force needs to be applied. But in general I share your observation - runs very smooth.

JoshTriplett 10y ago
Why use 1Password, rather than Firefox Sync/Accounts?
- binaryanomaly 10y ago
  Because it supports multi-browser, cross-platform and has way more features than FF sync.
  - JoshTriplett 10y ago
    Firefox Sync is cross-platform (it runs everywhere Firefox does), and it has every feature I want. What additional features do you want that it doesn't have?
    - janfoeh 10y ago
      Disclaimer: I'm writing this on Firefox. I was one of a couple of ten thousand people who donated money ten or so years ago for their famous NY Times ad when they were still going head-on against IE. I like them. This being said: if their Sync platform works for you, great. Here are my reasons why I choose 1Password as my password manager: 1. It's made by a company that focuses exclusively on this one product. It's their raison d'être, not a side project. 2. They're old-fashioned in a way: they provide me with something, and I give them money for it. 1Password is not cheap, but very good value for money - for me. 3. I've been using it for over half a decade now. 1. and 2. together give me a good reason to believe I can continue to do so for a long time to come. This is in stark contrast to Mozilla, who have been throwing stuff against the wall for quite a while now and abandoning it whenever things do not pan out 4. Various sync options. I'm not required to trust any one "cloud" provider when it comes to privacy, security or continued availability 5. The 1Password vault format can actually be opened in a browser. Even if by some strange fluke I find myself without a client, I can simply download the file on pretty much every machine and still access my passwords 6. UI. 1Password is very well thought out, and that's an important thing for me for something I use about a couple dozen times every day. While I cannot swear to it, I think I only paid twice over the last six years - the initial purchase plus one paid upgrade some time in the middle. I actually hope to pay for the next one; not only because of what I consider to be fair, but because I want them to do well and be around a long, long time. And when it comes to security, I've seen HN's resident crypto luminary tptacek give it his thumbs-up. This is something I am not able to properly assess on my own, so his word is good enough for me.
      - bad_user 10y ago
        Speaking as a 1Password customer and Firefox user ... Just because you pay for something, it doesn't make the business model sustainable. 1Password may be a solid product, but it's in essence a key-value store, which means that there isn't much AgileBits can do to improve it in order to get people to upgrade to a version 7. Heck mobile users would get that for free anyway. And btw, you're probably on macOS, because there is no Linux version, the stable Windows client sucks (version 4) and their new beta client (version 6) is read-only for usage without an account. In other words they have a potential problem: their market is not that big and the standalone version requires convincing people to upgrade for sustainability. And this puts their new subscription model in a new perspective. Which is cool and all, except that would you really pay $3 / month on a yearly contract ($3.6 actually with VAT included) for a password manager? I wouldn't. You can bring up the coffee comparisons of course, but I have other more important subscriptions to pay for that have priority (e.g. phone, email, storage, hosting, domains, etc). As for the endorsement of tptacek, if you care about the words of an HN user, he has endorsed only the standalone product, not the online enabled version to which they are now transitioning. Which no sane expert would endorse actually, given the problem of needing to enter your password in a web interface for account management. Now don't get me wrong, I think 1Password is a good product, but then you compared it with Firefox and Firefox is open source with its development being done in the open, with contributions by third parties as well, which means that no matter what, it will stick around for as long as people want it. Firefox is also one of our champions for open standards, being essentially an open platform for app development. Now this puts it in another league entirely.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        1. I'm not HN's resident crypto luminary. I'm HN's resident crypto loudmouth. 2. I endorse 1Password without reservation, but only the standalone version.
    - NamTaf 10y ago
      Integration outside of the browser is why I use keepass. I can press ctrl-alt-w and it will enter my passwords for things such as Steam, Skype, etc. in the applications themselves. I use passwords outside Firefox. Ergo, a password manager tied to Firefox is inherently too limited.
- mcpherrinm 10y ago
  I have a few reasons to prefer 1P over a browser based option: 1Password doesn't require a cloud sync. I just use the local wifi sync. I'm less worried about data breaches as a result. 1Password lets me save more than browser passwords: especially on mobile where I have lots of apps to log into, which shares a password with a desktop website. Also, I store additional data (like bank info, account numbers, etc) in 1P, and browsers don't have UX for that, even if the back end could be useful for that. It also doesn't lock me into a browser.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    I'd just like to point out that while it does use the cloud to sync, all data is encrypted on the devices before syncing. I do wish it could save other passwords, though.
  - JoshTriplett 10y ago
    > 1Password doesn't require a cloud sync. I just use the local wifi sync. I'm less worried about data breaches as a result. Firefox Sync encrypts all of its data; a data breach on the server would only result in a pile of email addresses and encrypted blobs. > 1Password lets me save more than browser passwords: especially on mobile where I have lots of apps to log into, which shares a password with a desktop website. Fair enough. All the mobile apps I use just stay logged in once you log in once. > Also, I store additional data (like bank info, account numbers, etc) in 1P, and browsers don't have UX for that, even if the back end could be useful for that. Hadn't occurred to me to store non-passwords in a password manager. That seems like something a Firefox extension could provide on top of the Firefox password manager, which would make a nice substitute for a locally encrypted file. I wouldn't mind using that to store things like security questions/answers.
    - mook 10y ago
      The old Firefox sync used a local-only passphrase to encrypt things. The new one, as far as I can tell, just tires everything to your Firefox Account (i.e. nothing local is required). That's not really better than what 1Password does, I think.
corv 10y ago
It shows up as incompatible but works fine.

JoshTriplett 10y ago

Why use 1Password, rather than Firefox Sync/Accounts?

binaryanomaly 10y ago
Because it supports multi-browser, cross-platform and has way more features than FF sync.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago
  Firefox Sync is cross-platform (it runs everywhere Firefox does), and it has every feature I want. What additional features do you want that it doesn't have?
  - janfoeh 10y ago
    Disclaimer: I'm writing this on Firefox. I was one of a couple of ten thousand people who donated money ten or so years ago for their famous NY Times ad when they were still going head-on against IE. I like them. This being said: if their Sync platform works for you, great. Here are my reasons why I choose 1Password as my password manager: 1. It's made by a company that focuses exclusively on this one product. It's their raison d'être, not a side project. 2. They're old-fashioned in a way: they provide me with something, and I give them money for it. 1Password is not cheap, but very good value for money - for me. 3. I've been using it for over half a decade now. 1. and 2. together give me a good reason to believe I can continue to do so for a long time to come. This is in stark contrast to Mozilla, who have been throwing stuff against the wall for quite a while now and abandoning it whenever things do not pan out 4. Various sync options. I'm not required to trust any one "cloud" provider when it comes to privacy, security or continued availability 5. The 1Password vault format can actually be opened in a browser. Even if by some strange fluke I find myself without a client, I can simply download the file on pretty much every machine and still access my passwords 6. UI. 1Password is very well thought out, and that's an important thing for me for something I use about a couple dozen times every day. While I cannot swear to it, I think I only paid twice over the last six years - the initial purchase plus one paid upgrade some time in the middle. I actually hope to pay for the next one; not only because of what I consider to be fair, but because I want them to do well and be around a long, long time. And when it comes to security, I've seen HN's resident crypto luminary tptacek give it his thumbs-up. This is something I am not able to properly assess on my own, so his word is good enough for me.
    - bad_user 10y ago
      Speaking as a 1Password customer and Firefox user ... Just because you pay for something, it doesn't make the business model sustainable. 1Password may be a solid product, but it's in essence a key-value store, which means that there isn't much AgileBits can do to improve it in order to get people to upgrade to a version 7. Heck mobile users would get that for free anyway. And btw, you're probably on macOS, because there is no Linux version, the stable Windows client sucks (version 4) and their new beta client (version 6) is read-only for usage without an account. In other words they have a potential problem: their market is not that big and the standalone version requires convincing people to upgrade for sustainability. And this puts their new subscription model in a new perspective. Which is cool and all, except that would you really pay $3 / month on a yearly contract ($3.6 actually with VAT included) for a password manager? I wouldn't. You can bring up the coffee comparisons of course, but I have other more important subscriptions to pay for that have priority (e.g. phone, email, storage, hosting, domains, etc). As for the endorsement of tptacek, if you care about the words of an HN user, he has endorsed only the standalone product, not the online enabled version to which they are now transitioning. Which no sane expert would endorse actually, given the problem of needing to enter your password in a web interface for account management. Now don't get me wrong, I think 1Password is a good product, but then you compared it with Firefox and Firefox is open source with its development being done in the open, with contributions by third parties as well, which means that no matter what, it will stick around for as long as people want it. Firefox is also one of our champions for open standards, being essentially an open platform for app development. Now this puts it in another league entirely.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      1. I'm not HN's resident crypto luminary. I'm HN's resident crypto loudmouth. 2. I endorse 1Password without reservation, but only the standalone version.
  - NamTaf 10y ago
    Integration outside of the browser is why I use keepass. I can press ctrl-alt-w and it will enter my passwords for things such as Steam, Skype, etc. in the applications themselves. I use passwords outside Firefox. Ergo, a password manager tied to Firefox is inherently too limited.
mcpherrinm 10y ago
I have a few reasons to prefer 1P over a browser based option: 1Password doesn't require a cloud sync. I just use the local wifi sync. I'm less worried about data breaches as a result. 1Password lets me save more than browser passwords: especially on mobile where I have lots of apps to log into, which shares a password with a desktop website. Also, I store additional data (like bank info, account numbers, etc) in 1P, and browsers don't have UX for that, even if the back end could be useful for that. It also doesn't lock me into a browser.
- icebraining 10y ago
  I'd just like to point out that while it does use the cloud to sync, all data is encrypted on the devices before syncing. I do wish it could save other passwords, though.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago
  > 1Password doesn't require a cloud sync. I just use the local wifi sync. I'm less worried about data breaches as a result. Firefox Sync encrypts all of its data; a data breach on the server would only result in a pile of email addresses and encrypted blobs. > 1Password lets me save more than browser passwords: especially on mobile where I have lots of apps to log into, which shares a password with a desktop website. Fair enough. All the mobile apps I use just stay logged in once you log in once. > Also, I store additional data (like bank info, account numbers, etc) in 1P, and browsers don't have UX for that, even if the back end could be useful for that. Hadn't occurred to me to store non-passwords in a password manager. That seems like something a Firefox extension could provide on top of the Firefox password manager, which would make a nice substitute for a locally encrypted file. I wouldn't mind using that to store things like security questions/answers.
  - mook 10y ago
    The old Firefox sync used a local-only passphrase to encrypt things. The new one, as far as I can tell, just tires everything to your Firefox Account (i.e. nothing local is required). That's not really better than what 1Password does, I think.

corv 10y ago

It shows up as incompatible but works fine.