4 ms·
Yeah I don't see the advantages of this compared to `pass` as well. The whole source code of bash pass [1] is almost as long as a single header file [2] from t
by dnpp123 7y ago
Yeah I don't see the advantages of this compared to `pass` as well.
The whole source code of bash pass [1] is almost as long as a single header file [2] from this C++ software. Plus pass already handles backup... Minimalist heh.
[1] https://git.zx2c4.com/password-store/tree/src/password-store.sh https://git.zx2c4.com/password-store/tree/src/password-store...
[2] https://github.com/JFreegman/SpicyPass/blob/master/src/spicy.hpp https://github.com/JFreegman/SpicyPass/blob/master/src/spicy...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- Jfreegman 7y agoThe pass source code you linked to is just a wrapper for the unix toolset (and has twice the byte count, not that it matters). Pass has a completely different crypto implementation and security model than SpicyPass. The two are not synonymous, either in features or UX. I elaborated on more of the differences between the two in a different reply to a similar comment. tl;dr different strokes for different folks. I didn't write spicypass with the intent of replacing pass.
- dnpp123 7y ago> just a wrapper for the unix toolset Yeah, that's the point of using Unix, and why pass is great for that.