• frank@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I double down on Yikes.

    Why not just use KeePass instead? I think it’s different and AI free

    • e8d79@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 hours ago

      There is no official support for Linux and I am pretty sure that the browser plugin is windows only. I liked the browser integration of KeePassXC but I will probably need to say goodbye to that feature as nothing else supports that on Linux. GNOME Secrets looks OK as an alternative.

        • e8d79@discuss.tchncs.deOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          16 hours ago

          There is an unofficial mono port available but it looks like ass and, since it also can’t do autofill in my browser, it has no benefits over GNOME Secrets.

          • Forester@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            I’d never trust the browser to have direct access ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯ i copy paste

            • rook@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              That’s a funny thing to say. The communication channel between the browser and whatever external password store can be made as restricted as you like… keepassxc and its browser api let you restrict which credentials are offered to the browser, and can let you manually OK each request, for example. It doesn’t need unrestricted read access.

              The bitwarden browser plugins are a bit more dubious though, because they communicate with a remote password store with more limited controls, and their enthusiasm for trying to store passkeys and totp hashes is definitely worth avoiding.