7 ms·

they don't store any passwords.

by there 16y ago

jacquesm 16y ago
That doesn't mean they can't be compromised. After all, if 1 password gets hacked the passwords that are generated could be sent to two parties instead of just to you.
- ubernostrum 16y ago
  After all, if 1 password gets hacked the passwords that are generated could be sent to two parties instead of just to you. And if someone mounts a camera in the smoke detector in my apartment they could see me type in the double super secret password whose plaintext has never been stored by a computer. So what's your point, exactly? Tools which generate good passwords and store them locally on your computer with decent-enough security are light-years ahead of what most people do, and their use should be encouraged.
  - anthonyb 16y ago
    They're not open source, and I don't see any checksums on their site - so it's possible that their site could be hacked and have a trojan version uploaded. Harder to do for the iPhone/iPad version, but it might still be possible for a clever hacker^Wcracker to put something into the source code if they can get access to it.
    - ubernostrum 16y ago
      Yes, and a clever hacker might sabotage my C compiler to always build a back door into software it compiles. Even if the compiler's open source that can be hard or impossible to detect. But in my experience, too many people confuse "this is a possible threat" with "this is a threat it's reasonable for me worry/take action about", and that's what I was getting at.
      - anthonyb 16y ago
        C compilers are distributed with checksums and public key signatures, plus it's possible to decompile generated binaries and examine them - so it's at least an order of magnitude harder to compromise them. 1password is easier and a much juicier target, so compromised binaries are definitely a possible threat. How would you know it was compromised, unless you had a packet sniffer going on your network?
        jacquesm 16y ago
        On their network!
        anthonyb 16y ago
        If you're using the iPhone/iPad version. The Mac/Windows ones seem to be downloads: http://agilewebsolutions.com/downloads http://agilewebsolutions.com/downloads
        ubernostrum 16y ago
        Again: you're saying "possible threat". I agree it's possible. What you have not demonstrated is that it's likely or reasonable enough to serve as a basis for changing my own actions. It's possible that a password manager could be completely open source, distributed with checksums and public key signatures, that my C compiler could be completely open source and distributed with checksums and public key signatures, and I could still end up with a backdoor in the final compiled result, detectable only by deciding to carefully examine the binary I just built. This is a "possible threat". Should I use that possibility as a justification for never using a password manager? Or for never using a C compiler?
        anthonyb 16y ago
        Simply put, you need to have some assurance that the binary that you're downloading is the one that the developers compiled, and the easiest way to do that is to have crypto checksums. If you don't, all bets are off. And it's not just a "possible threat" but a likely one, and it's happened multiple times in the past. Sites get hacked all the time, and trojans are standard practice these days (unlike compromised-binary-generating C compilers): https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/savannah-gnu-site-compromised-113010 https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/savannah-gnu-site-comprom... http://www.esecurityplanet.com/trends/article.php/2248811/GNU-Project-Server-Hacked-by-Intruder.htm http://www.esecurityplanet.com/trends/article.php/2248811/GN... https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/apache-site-hacked-through-ssh-key-compromise-082809 https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/apache-site-hacked-throug...

they don't store any passwords.

by there 16y ago

they don't store any passwords.

That doesn't mean they can't be compromised. After all, if 1 password gets hacked the passwords that are generated could be sent to two parties instead of just to you.

ubernostrum 16y ago
After all, if 1 password gets hacked the passwords that are generated could be sent to two parties instead of just to you. And if someone mounts a camera in the smoke detector in my apartment they could see me type in the double super secret password whose plaintext has never been stored by a computer. So what's your point, exactly? Tools which generate good passwords and store them locally on your computer with decent-enough security are light-years ahead of what most people do, and their use should be encouraged.
- anthonyb 16y ago
  They're not open source, and I don't see any checksums on their site - so it's possible that their site could be hacked and have a trojan version uploaded. Harder to do for the iPhone/iPad version, but it might still be possible for a clever hacker^Wcracker to put something into the source code if they can get access to it.
  - ubernostrum 16y ago
    Yes, and a clever hacker might sabotage my C compiler to always build a back door into software it compiles. Even if the compiler's open source that can be hard or impossible to detect. But in my experience, too many people confuse "this is a possible threat" with "this is a threat it's reasonable for me worry/take action about", and that's what I was getting at.
    - anthonyb 16y ago
      C compilers are distributed with checksums and public key signatures, plus it's possible to decompile generated binaries and examine them - so it's at least an order of magnitude harder to compromise them. 1password is easier and a much juicier target, so compromised binaries are definitely a possible threat. How would you know it was compromised, unless you had a packet sniffer going on your network?
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        On their network!
        anthonyb 16y ago
        If you're using the iPhone/iPad version. The Mac/Windows ones seem to be downloads: http://agilewebsolutions.com/downloads http://agilewebsolutions.com/downloads
      - ubernostrum 16y ago
        Again: you're saying "possible threat". I agree it's possible. What you have not demonstrated is that it's likely or reasonable enough to serve as a basis for changing my own actions. It's possible that a password manager could be completely open source, distributed with checksums and public key signatures, that my C compiler could be completely open source and distributed with checksums and public key signatures, and I could still end up with a backdoor in the final compiled result, detectable only by deciding to carefully examine the binary I just built. This is a "possible threat". Should I use that possibility as a justification for never using a password manager? Or for never using a C compiler?
        anthonyb 16y ago
        Simply put, you need to have some assurance that the binary that you're downloading is the one that the developers compiled, and the easiest way to do that is to have crypto checksums. If you don't, all bets are off. And it's not just a "possible threat" but a likely one, and it's happened multiple times in the past. Sites get hacked all the time, and trojans are standard practice these days (unlike compromised-binary-generating C compilers): https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/savannah-gnu-site-compromised-113010 https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/savannah-gnu-site-comprom... http://www.esecurityplanet.com/trends/article.php/2248811/GNU-Project-Server-Hacked-by-Intruder.htm http://www.esecurityplanet.com/trends/article.php/2248811/GN... https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/apache-site-hacked-through-ssh-key-compromise-082809 https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/apache-site-hacked-throug...