4 ms·

Honestly, I think your opinion is unpopular because it demonstrates a serious lack of understanding or thought. If you re-use the same password for all sites,

Honestly, I think your opinion is unpopular because it demonstrates a serious lack of understanding or thought. If you re-use the same password for all sites, it takes just one sketchy site being compromised for all of your other sites to become compromised. In the case of a password manager, the manager itself is the one that needs to be compromised, and you have more reason to trust them to avoid being compromised than some other random site. Some random sketchy website being hacked doesn't need to effect the rest of your network of logins if you use a manager. Most password managers (such as 1password) won't let anyone from any machine access your stored passwords over the web by just supplying your single password. They require multiple extra steps that are quite limiting, so for the most part they first need access to a computer that you've already installed your password manager on. Furthermore, if your password manager is compromised, you have a very clear path to your password on that manager, and then a list of all the websites, usernames and passwords that you need to change in order to regain secruity. By contrast, I'm still rediscovering old websites I used 10 years ago that used my old omni-password which was compromised.

29athrowaway 6y ago
Your mistake is assuming I had not thought of that. I have, and my position remains the same.
- eigenspace 6y ago
  Then you should explain why you think what you think instead of just throwing around self proclaimed "unpopular opinions" without any explanation. With the information you've provided (i.e. none), it really just looks like an uninformed opinion. Why do you think the points I listed above don't make password managers more secure than password reuse?
- luhn 6y ago
  Do you have a counterpoint, or do you have this opinion solely for the sake of having a contentious opinion?
  - 29athrowaway 6y ago
    Using a password manager is a good idea. Using a password manager as a service is my point of contention.
    - luhn 6y ago
      You still haven't substantiated your opinion in any way.
      - dylan604 6y ago
        What if service goes away? Even if stand alone app vendor goes away, the app still works. There are things that I see are okay as a monthly service like Netflix or other content provider where the content is literally changing month to month. Stand alone software that rarely changes, like 1Pass, does not warrant a monthly service fee from me. I am self-hosting the content, so I don't need their cloud services.
        ajford 6y ago
        Playing devil's advocate here, but the service fee (at least to my mind) is more for the maintenance & upkeep of the infra. I'd gladly move to self-hosting if it was only me. But after a few months, I was able to convince my wife to use it for convenience and security. So if there's an issue with the self-hosted version, it wouldn't just be me impacted, but my wife. And that's an SLA you don't wanna break. :D Also, while I know I could probably do a decent job securing the hosting server, I would rather not have that on my mind. That's not my day-job, so I'll leave it to a team of people who are paid to do that. Lastly, the service fee is $60/yr, but for sake of argument, lets call it $100. That's 2hrs of my time at my hourly pay. If setting up a self-hosted version takes me more than 2hrs to get it running, it's not worth my time.
        dylan604 6y ago
        Haha, those are great points. However, if you make $50/hour and it takes any where close to an hour to install 1Pass, you're overpaid!! The install is super simple. Setting up the passwords is an ongoing thing and something I consider outside of the initial setup of the self-hosted version.
- yreg 6y ago
  Even though you thought of ways in which A is more secure than B, your position that B is just as secure as A remains? Also: What is, in that case, the proper solution ordinary people should follow?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
xur17 6y ago
> If you re-use the same password for all sites, it takes just one sketchy site being compromised for all of your other sites to become compromised. And speaking as someone that operates a website accepting passwords, this happens more than you'd think. There are hackers that actively try leaked lists of username / passwords against websites using botnets. If your password is leaked by one website, people will attempt to reuse it on other websites.

29athrowaway 6y ago

Your mistake is assuming I had not thought of that. I have, and my position remains the same.

eigenspace 6y ago
Then you should explain why you think what you think instead of just throwing around self proclaimed "unpopular opinions" without any explanation. With the information you've provided (i.e. none), it really just looks like an uninformed opinion. Why do you think the points I listed above don't make password managers more secure than password reuse?
luhn 6y ago
Do you have a counterpoint, or do you have this opinion solely for the sake of having a contentious opinion?
- 29athrowaway 6y ago
  Using a password manager is a good idea. Using a password manager as a service is my point of contention.
  - luhn 6y ago
    You still haven't substantiated your opinion in any way.
    - dylan604 6y ago
      What if service goes away? Even if stand alone app vendor goes away, the app still works. There are things that I see are okay as a monthly service like Netflix or other content provider where the content is literally changing month to month. Stand alone software that rarely changes, like 1Pass, does not warrant a monthly service fee from me. I am self-hosting the content, so I don't need their cloud services.
      - ajford 6y ago
        Playing devil's advocate here, but the service fee (at least to my mind) is more for the maintenance & upkeep of the infra. I'd gladly move to self-hosting if it was only me. But after a few months, I was able to convince my wife to use it for convenience and security. So if there's an issue with the self-hosted version, it wouldn't just be me impacted, but my wife. And that's an SLA you don't wanna break. :D Also, while I know I could probably do a decent job securing the hosting server, I would rather not have that on my mind. That's not my day-job, so I'll leave it to a team of people who are paid to do that. Lastly, the service fee is $60/yr, but for sake of argument, lets call it $100. That's 2hrs of my time at my hourly pay. If setting up a self-hosted version takes me more than 2hrs to get it running, it's not worth my time.
        dylan604 6y ago
        Haha, those are great points. However, if you make $50/hour and it takes any where close to an hour to install 1Pass, you're overpaid!! The install is super simple. Setting up the passwords is an ongoing thing and something I consider outside of the initial setup of the self-hosted version.
yreg 6y ago
Even though you thought of ways in which A is more secure than B, your position that B is just as secure as A remains? Also: What is, in that case, the proper solution ordinary people should follow?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

xur17 6y ago

> If you re-use the same password for all sites, it takes just one sketchy site being compromised for all of your other sites to become compromised. And speaking as someone that operates a website accepting passwords, this happens more than you'd think. There are hackers that actively try leaked lists of username / passwords against websites using botnets. If your password is leaked by one website, people will attempt to reuse it on other websites.