16 ms·
KeePassXC 2.6.0 Released
- runxel 6y agoBeen on the "regular" KeePass all along. Should I switch?
- raziel2p 6y agoI switched many years ago because Keepass didn't work well (or at all) on Linux. Since then, I think KeepassX and especially KeepassXC have surpassed the original Keepass in quality - so yes. One thing that really amazed me was recently (1-2 years ago) KeepassXC got rid of the lock file and made it possible for multiple processes/computers to seamlessly work on the same file. This is fantastic for situations like having 2 computers running at the same time, opening a Keepass database file from Dropbox.
- runxel 6y agoFair point, but I'm a Windows user, so that alone is not really an argument. The interface looks better, sure, but nothing really makes me to be dissatisfied.
- theandrewbailey 6y agoI switched because KeePassXC has TOTP and SSH key functionality built in, instead of being provided by plugins.
- rburhum 6y agoI am assuming there are ways to turn off health checks to “ Have I Been Pwned”. I never want my local password manager to do outcalls for any reason...
- ObsoleteNerd 6y agoYou manually run the audit, and it makes it very clear that it’s about to do an online activity: https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/pull/4438 https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/pull/4438
- galacticdessert 6y agoThe application does not perform this check automatically, it is a report that you have to request explicitly. There is also a warning upon request that a remote request will be performed.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- siraben 6y agoKeePassXC + Nextcloud has surplanted any other password manager for me for the last two years. The OTP integration is great as well.
- galacticdessert 6y agoSame here, the setup is working great I use Keepass2Android, which works great with Nextcloud and handles very well offline usage and subsequent merge of the database. On iOS the experience is much worse: I use KeePassium but it does not connect natively to Nextcloud, so I use BoxCryptor for that. The downside is that if Nextcloud is unreachable, I cannot see my saved passwords. Anyone managed to have a good experience on iOS?
- galacticdessert 6y agoUpdate: after writing this I checked again, and with the latest update to the Nextcloud iOS app it is possible to directly open and save the Keepass database from Nextcloud. No need for BoxCryptor anymore. Hurray for Nextcloud!
- isanengineer 6y agoI've had a very good experience with Strongbox. I personally haven't used the Nextcloud integration yet so I can't vouch for that specifically, but I've used it with multiple cloud services and it's been seamless every time. It also caches your database locally, which should solve the problems you were having with BoxCryptor. It is freemium, and the really useful features will cost $1 per month, but there is also an option to purchase a perpetual license. Quality indie apps are hard to come by iOS these days, and I'm glad to pay for a service that's so integral to my daily life. https://strongboxsafe.com/ https://strongboxsafe.com/
- nicolaslem 6y agoFor me the winning combo is KeePassXC + Syncthing.
- m-p-3 6y ago
- mwexler 6y agoThoughts on comparing this to bitwarden? Pros, cons?
- ufo 6y agoThe main difference for me is if you want to use it on multiple devices, for example your computer and your phone. In bitwarden this is seamless because it always saves to the cloud. With keepass you have to manually set up the file sharing with syncthing/dropbox/etc. One problem I had is that sometimes the file sync I set up wouldn't work properly and I'd add new passwords on the phone before it received the latest file version from the computer. When that happens you end up with some passwords that are only on the computer and some that are only on the phone, which is something that syncthing can't fix by itself.
- skipnup 6y agoAnd it doesn’t offer to synchronize them? Currently I’m using regular KeePass 2 and Keepass2Android and both offer to sync the changes in case I edit both at the same time… I would’ve thought KeePassXC does the same.
- mikece 6y agoThis was the biggest reason I moved from KeePassXC to BitWarden. If I'm only creating new accounts on my phone then sending those credentials to my self via Signal or Wire is no big deal (update on my desktop, synch to iCloud, pull down new KDBX file on my phone for Strongbox which I use in readonly mode). If I'm creating account credentials on a platform where I don't have Signal or Wire installed (a shared Chrimebook, for example) then what... sending to myself by email draft? Add in mobile testing on devices on which a factory reset is regularly executed then it becomes an even easier choice in favor of BitWarden. My experiences are my own; KeePassXC allows a much higher level of security than anything that's cloud-based but it's also not as convenient to use. For me, that makes Bitwarden the "right" choice. I only used one computer all the time then I would use KeePassXC without a doubt.
- ilitirit 6y agoDoes anyone know if the browser integration is similar to/better than Lastpass or Bitwarden? Does it even have browser integration?
- varjolintu 6y agoIt does have a browser integration. Available for Firefox, Chrome/Chromium/Vivaldi/Brave/Edge and Tor Browser.
- galacticdessert 6y agoPretty good I would say, not much worse than LastPass
- throwaway8941 6y agoHave you tried looking at their website? https://keepassxc.org/docs/KeePassXC_GettingStarted.html#_setup_browser_integration https://keepassxc.org/docs/KeePassXC_GettingStarted.html#_se...
- preek 6y agoI've been using it ever since ditching OSX in favor of Debian Linux. On OSX, I used 1password and the KeePassXC browser extension works just as fine. In fact, better, because 1Password stopped working for Chromium due to whatever proprietary cert requirement which wasn't met.
- ricardbejarano 6y agoI use the browser extension all the time (Chrome). When it works, it works great. You can tell the extension to auto-fill and auto-submit, so that it feels like you had been logged in from the very beginning. The problem is, it works (in my experience) around 80% of the time. I'm guessing it's not on them since it requieres websites to follow certain standards in order to have autodetectable login form fields, but it's a pain nonetheless. Try it, it takes a couple mins to set up. The best feature IMO is the keyboard shortcuts to fill in details.
- 6y ago
- preek 6y agoI've been using KeePassXC ever since switching from OSX to Debian Linux. On OSX, I used 1Password and have been an advocate for years. However, after being forced to upgrade (and pay again) multiple times due to API changes, and the integration stopped working with various browsers, I wasn't a happy customer anymore. KeePassXC works just as good, if not better. I'm using it on Debian, with browser extensions and on iOS (and sometimes even on my old Macbook Pro on OSX). Being FOSS, I'm not afraid anymore that stuff will stop working at some point, because some proprietary API is deprecated.
- cies 6y agoYou might want to checkout BitWarden. A FOSS server exists (even on in Rust, iirc) and there are opensource clients as well (browser plugins maintained by BitWarden). This system is "zero knowledge", the server does not get to see the passwords in normal operation (it does in case of imports, which I think is a huge security flaw one can mitigate by not importing). Another thing: Keepass(XC) became a snap package on recent Ubuntus. If there's one piece of software I dont want to be a snap package it is this tool. It get slow, ugly and hard to find (in a process tree). This is the last piece of software I want to run in snap.
- varjolintu 6y agoYou can still use the official PPA or AppImage.
- tenuousemphasis 6y ago> (it does in case of imports, which I think is a huge security flaw one can mitigate by not importing) Wait, why is that the case?
- teekert 6y agoWhy not? Isn't it nice that you can control what other software can reach it?
- preek 6y agoI did check it out before using KeePassXC, thank you. I took a whole day to check out all available FOSS options. KeePassXC won based on my criteria by a long shot. One deadly reason against BitWarden (for me): Having a FOSS server that's not officially supported and more or less reverse engineered, is even worse than a proprietary API. It can become defunct at any point in time - and it might even be hard to catch it. At least, with 1P, when they deprecated their old Apps, they announced it. Not saying that BitWarden is bad in any way. Just saying that the KeePassXC stack is FOSS all the way with no lock in and multiple implementations of the Keepass file format. As for the SNAP package: I'm not versed in that. I'm just using the regular Debian package. Works fine for me.
- elric 6y agoWhile we're on the subject of password managers ... I'm still looking for one with decent multi-user & group support, with audit trails, which is self-hosted. Bitwarden sounded promising, but I'm put off by their MS based stack and their pricing model. Any other recommendations would be greatly appreciated.
- eumenides1 6y agoI'm been considering jumping to bitwarden
- risyachka 6y agoWhat don't you like about their pricing model?
- woldemariam 6y agoCan you please say more on what you mean by MS based stack? It runs on azure?
- berkes 6y agoI'm not sure what you mean by "their MS based stack", but if it is not about the build tools (.net etc), but about them hosting on azure: Bitwarden can be selfhosted just fine on Linux. https://github.com/bitwarden/server#linux--macos https://github.com/bitwarden/server#linux--macos
- 6y ago
- trabant00 6y agoAnother option you should consider: https://www.passwordstore.org/ https://www.passwordstore.org/ It's just a bash script that used gpg and git. I find it the most KISS solution. Not available on phones but I don't trust my phone with my secrets anyway.
- ComodoHacker 6y agoI can't count a requirement to have git wherever you need a password as a KISS solution.
- djagoo 6y agoYou can set up your store with git but it's optional.
- woile 6y agoThere's an android version: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/dev.msfjarvis.aps/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/dev.msfjarvis.aps/ I use it and it works quite well. Also gopass exists, which is useful to share secrets with teams + your personals, same interface. I wrote about it [0] + a cheatsheet [1] [0]: http://woile.github.io/posts/sharing-team-secrets/ http://woile.github.io/posts/sharing-team-secrets/ [1]: https://woile.github.io/gopass-cheat-sheet/ https://woile.github.io/gopass-cheat-sheet/
- djagoo 6y agoPasswordstore is just awesome. We're using gopass (go port of the pass scripts) which supports multiple stores to be mounted so we can have different recipients i.e. for team1, team2 and private. In combination with browserpass for firefox and android-password-store for smartphone it's the simplest and best tool I ever used for password management. And the best part: it's just simple text files which are encrypted using gpg. So we just sync them with syncthing and even if the pass or gopass program would go away in the future we can use gpg decrypt.
- c0bruhh 6y agoI use "Pass - Password Store" [1] for iOS and it works a charm for me. You have to import your GPG key to it and set up your git connection to your server and you're all set. It also supports OTP generation which is really nice. [1]: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/pass-password-store/id1205820573 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/pass-password-store/id12058205...
- i_am_proteus 6y agoKeepassXC with the .pdb synced with git and locally-distributed .key files has been my go-to for years. I don't use browser extensions.
- room505 6y agoI've been using the original KeePass for a long time. I'm an architect, not a coder/software developer. So my question is a bit naive on this forum, but why is KeePass 10mb installed and KeePassXC 108mb if they do the same thing? I like that KeePass has plugins that I can tailor to my needs. Does KeePassXC make the same security software changes as KeePass? I forgot one more question, can I use KeePass2Android if I switched?
- varjolintu 6y agoThe size of KeePassXC application is the following (inspecting macOS version here): - Binaries itself = 9,1M - Plugins (styles, icon engines etc) = 12M - Resources (icons, documentation, translations) = 15M - Libraries (Qt, crypto, Yubikey etc.) = 38M
- delfinom 6y agoI've used the original KeePass for a long while but find KeePassXC just more likable. And in general, even the OTP support is brillant.
- jwigg 6y ago- the size difference is because KeePass offloads a lot of work to the .Net framework, and in contrast KeePassXC does that same work itself. - I'm not positive I'm understanding your question, but KeePassXC takes security just as seriously as the original KeePass does - Yes, you can use KeePass2Android, or any other KeePass compatible software. KeePass and KeePassXC use exactly the same database format
- SamuelAdams 6y agoHi there, I have a genuine question about your comment and I apologize if this comes across as attacking, that is not my intent at all. > why is KeePass 10mb installed and KeePassXC 108mb Why does the file size matter? Are the devices you use so short on storage that an extra 100 mb is an issue? Obviously if it was something like 50 GB then yes, that makes sense but in general most HDD's and devices have GB's of empty space.
- 6y ago
- amedvednikov 6y agoIs it better than KeePassX?
- donmb 6y agoI like the design of X more Not sure what is better in XC though
- amedvednikov 6y agoX looks very unnatural on macos https://i.imgur.com/JtXVZW2.png https://i.imgur.com/JtXVZW2.png
- thayne 6y agoKeepassxc is actively maintained. Keepassx, not so much.
- sandreas 6y agoI'm excited to try this out. Just to mention two interesting projects: On MacOS I use: https://macpassapp.org/ https://macpassapp.org/ (Open Source) I always wanted to try: https://www.passbolt.com/ https://www.passbolt.com/ (Self-hostable)
- vehemenz 6y agoI switched from MacPass to KeePassXC because it supports newer versions of the KeePass database spec and is compatible with Windows and Linux. If you ever end up sharing password databases, it's a must.
- balladeer 6y agoCould you please specify what is the dataspec support difference between MacPass and KeePassXC? As for formats they both support KDBX4. But yes, MacPass dev and releases are very slow. It's just that it has been such a functional and stable native app since years.
- the_svd_doctor 6y agoHow trusted are the iOS/Android app compared to the "mainstream" desktop clients like KeepassXC ? I'm a bit wary of downloading a "random client" from the App Store. Are those audited/trusted as much ?
- tinalumfoil 6y agoI've been using Keepass2Android [0] for a few years now (synced with the desktop client) and haven't had any issues. I'm not aware if any audits on it, but I'm not sure the risk of a developer pushing malicious binaries is that much higher on the play store than the arch/debian/snap/brew repositories. [0] https://github.com/PhilippC/keepass2android https://github.com/PhilippC/keepass2android
- the_svd_doctor 6y agoI imagine those on iOS/Android are "complete" re-implementation of the client. Isn't that the case ?
- tinalumfoil 6y agoI've never contributed to it, but my understanding is KeepassXC is both a library and desktop client (and cli client, which I've never used) and that the app uses the library to manipulate the database. This piece of documentation seems to confirm this. https://github.com/PhilippC/keepass2android/blob/master/docs/Keepass2Android-Apk.md https://github.com/PhilippC/keepass2android/blob/master/docs...
- donmb 6y agoI like the simplicity/design of KeePassX more than XC
- phonebucket 6y agoHas anyone migrated from Lastpass to KeePassXC? Was it difficult?
- Semaphor 6y agoLastpass to Keepass2 years ago, it was simply export/import. I assume it’s pretty much the same for XC
- Sander_Marechal 6y agoWord of warning: Don't use KeePassXC when your co-workers use KeePass2 using a network drive. KeePassXC doesn't support KP2's sync protocol. You'll clobber other people's changes when you save using XC. It took us a few weeks before we noticed that many passwords were missing.
- Florin_Andrei 6y agoBut that sounds like the wrong thing to do. Why are you all pointing all your apps at a shared "database" file? And how about locking issues?
- SloopJon 6y agoThis seems to be a supported feature of KeePass 2: "When invoking the 'Save' command, KeePass checks whether the file on disk/server has been modified while you were editing it. If it has been modified, KeePass prompts whether you want to overwrite or synchronize with the file." https://keepass.info/help/v2/sync.html https://keepass.info/help/v2/sync.html KeePassXC, on the other hand, does not seem to have been designed for shared synchronization: "Cloud synchronization ... can be easily accomplished by simply storing your KeePassXC database inside your shared cloud folder and letting your desktop synchronization client do the rest. We prefer this approach, because it is simple, not tied to a specific cloud provider and keeps the complexity of our code low." https://keepassxc.org/docs/#faq-cloudsync https://keepassxc.org/docs/#faq-cloudsync
- quicksilver03 6y agoThe synchronization feature is what's keeping me on KeePass 2 (running on Mono in Linux) , despite the fact that the interface looks completely out of place in my KDE system.
- NoSubstitute 6y agoOh, thank you! Potentially saved us from unnecessary headaches. I'll be sure to use regular KeePass when editing a shared database. For my own db I prefer KeePassXC, and use DropBox for syncing between devices.
- mlukaszek 6y agoAlso a user. Works well in general, although I continue to be sad to see the arrogance during argumenting in an issue that is a valid and necessary usecase for many people using online banking. https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues/725 https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues/725
- muska3 6y agoI'm curious why would anyone on Windows use KeePassXC instead of KeePass. Are KeePass plugins compatible?
- ntauthority 6y agoCommonly used plugins seem to have built-in data format and behavioral compatibility, and I guess a big reason would be for consistency across platforms - and now the custom Qt stylesheets, if that's your thing.
- deeter72 6y agoFor me personally because the author of KeePass is a stubborn person who is hellbent on not using a VCS. I see no reason why one would not use a VCS in 2020. From a security point of view this is a massive violation of trust due to the fact that a criminal entity could hypothetically sneak into the computer of the author of KeePass and modify a cpp file to link to malware and the author will have no idea of it and when he compiles and distributes it. He would have unknowingly distributed malware which due to the context of the application can cause massive damage. I do know that I can compile myself but still I cannot audit every single release, this can be migitated by myself using git and extracting tar files on every release. But this should not be this difficult. KeePassXC on the other hand is more practical and works on all platforms consistently and is easy to compile with cmake and has convenient cmake switches to disable network connectivity.
- Paul-ish 6y agoIf you like KeePassXC you should consider donating. I donate $5 a month because it's worth paying for good software. https://keepassxc.org/donate/ https://keepassxc.org/donate/
- virgilp 6y agoWait, so there's Keepass, KeepassX and KeepassXC? I understand the X is cross-platform (initially was linux-only) whereas presumably Keepass is win-only; but what's the "community fork" for? Why not improve KeepassX? And why don't KeepassX and Keepass merge now?
- delfinom 6y agoKeepass 1 is .NET Framework based. Keepass 2 is .NET Framework and has a Mono build of varying success. 1 and 2 are the originals and still actively developed. KeepassX has stalled development since 2016 but was a true cross platform desktop client KeepassXC is the fork of X and at this point in time is lightyears ahead of X. I'm sure the developers of XC may have wanted to contribute to X but X seems to have been spearheaded by a single developer who stalled on letting other devs become maintainers. So the community forked it. But to answer the question, it's impossible to merge X and the original because their code bases are in entirely different languages and arguably X doesn't give you anything than the one man dev show.
- awill 6y agoYears ago I used KeePassX. It became stale, ugly, and didn't have a good Android app. KeePassX then moved to .NET, and didn't work well on Linux, so I looked around. I settled on enpass as it was a paid app without a subscription, and withyour choice of sync/backup. Enpass has excellent desktop/mobile apps with sync using your choice of cloud service. I'm very happy with it.
- 120photo 6y agoI actually just finished moving from 1Password to Enpass. KeePassXC was in the mix and is nice but what killed it for me was the lack of credit card / template support. Did not like the 1Password move from offline storage to online sync. You can buy a license but it is about $70 or so per platform. Enpass desktop is free and I can sync to my Synology using WebDav. That all said, I really hope KeePassXC vastly improves because I would love love love to use as much OSS as I can.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- fgonzag 6y agoAnother satisfied enpass customer here, also switched from keypass. Great multi platform support, browser integration, webdav support (makes sync a breeze if you have a webdav server like owncloud, seafile, or a Synology Nas)
- jeltz 6y agoKeepassX is still written in C++, the project is just dead. I think you are confusing Keepass (.NET) and KeepassX (C++). KeepassXC is a fork of KeepassX. https://github.com/keepassx/keepassx https://github.com/keepassx/keepassx
- eric1293 6y agoHow does Keepassxc compare to other password managers (passwordstore with gpg-agent/gnome keyring, 1password, Bitwarden, etc) in terms of protecting secrets when the vault is unlocked? For example, part of data may be held unencrypted in RAM that could be read by OS or other programs. Any use of TPM?
- gigababe 6y agoI used to use KeePass and KeePassXC for years at a time, but the amount of time I have saved not having to mess with syncing issues more than makes up for the ~$30 a year for 1password that always works across windows, linux, ios and mac.
- qwerty456127 6y agoWhy do people insist on putting everything, even passwords, in folders? I find categorizing files, let alone passwords, into a strict taxonomy a particularly hard job of questionable usefulness. It would be much handier if we could just tag the records with a number of tags + add a description and/or comment rather than put it in a folder. I always use search rather than manual folder tree navigation anyway.