• 1 Post
  • 12 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • wols@lemm.eetoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlGot no time to code
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Bonus: good tests can also serve as technical documentation.

    Though I have to disagree with the notion that documentation is as important or more so than code.
    Documentation is certainly near the top of the list and often undervalued. I’ve worked on a project where documentation was lacking and it was painful to say the least.
    Without documentation, changing or adding features can be a nightmare. Investigating bugs and offering support is also very difficult. But without code, you have nothing. No product, no users, no value.

    There are (inferior) substitutes for documentation: specialized team knowledge, general technical expertise. These alternative pools of knowledge can be leveraged to create and improve documentation incrementally.
    There’s no replacement for the actual functionality of your applications.



  • The main difference is that 1Password requires two pieces of information for decrypting your passwords while Bitwarden requires only one.

    Requiring an additional secret in the form of a decryption key has both upsides and downsides:

    • if someone somehow gets access to your master password, they won’t be able to decrypt your passwords unless they also got access to your secret key (or one of your trusted devices)
    • a weak master password doesn’t automatically make you vulnerable
    • if you lose access to your secret key, your passwords are not recoverable
    • additional effort to properly secure your key

    So whether you want both or only password protection is a trade-off between the additional protection the key offers and the increased complexity of adequately securing it.

    Your proposed scenarios of the master password being brute forced or the servers being hacked and your master password acquired when using Bitwarden are misleading.

    Brute forcing the master password is not feasible, unless it is weak (too short, common, or part of a breach). By default, Bitwarden protects against brute force attacks on the password itself using PBKDF2 with 600k iterations. Brute forcing AES-256 (to get into the vault without finding the master password) is not possible according to current knowledge.

    Your master password cannot be “acquired” if the Bitwarden servers are hacked.
    They store the (encrypted) symmetric key used to decrypt your vault as well as your vault (where all your passwords are stored), AES256-encrypted using said symmetric key.
    This symmetric key is itself AES256-encrypted using your master password (this is a simplification) before being sent to their servers.
    Neither your master password nor the symmetric key used to decrypt your password vault is recoverable from Bitwarden servers by anyone who doesn’t know your master password and by extension neither are the passwords stored in your encrypted vault.

    See https://bitwarden.com/help/bitwarden-security-white-paper/#overview-of-the-master-password-hashing-key-derivation-and-encryption-process for details.



  • If their password was actually good (18+ random characters) it’s not feasible with current day technology to brute force, no matter how few PBKDF2 iterations were used.

    Obviously it’s still a big issue because in many cases people don’t use strong enough passwords (and apparently LastPass stored some of the information in plaintext) but a strong password is still good protection provided the encryption algorithm doesn’t have any known exploitable weaknesses.



  • wols@lemm.eetoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlMy poor RAM...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The point is that you’re not fixing the problem, you’re just masking it (and one could even argue enabling it).

    The same way adding another 4 lane highway doesn’t fix traffic long term (increasing highway throughput leads to more people leads to more cars leads to congestion all over again) simply adding more RAM is only a temporary solution.

    Developers use the excuse of people having access to more RAM as justification to produce more and more bloated software. In 5 years you’ll likely struggle even with 32GiB, because everything uses more.
    That’s not sustainable, and it’s not necessary.


  • You don’t need to correct something everyone already knows is an exaggeration (and I agree it doesn’t seem very socially aware to do so) but this is a political discussion on the internet, so

    1. Everyone does not know the original figure is an exaggeration, especially by how much
    2. Providing the actual information ads value to the conversation and in this context this is more important than whether the commenter comes off as smarmy or socially inept

    What if they said “Hey I know you’re being hyperbolic, but for anyone who’s interested, here’s the number estimated by experts…”?
    The only difference here is tone.
     

    I’m not sure why they only shared numbers for minke whales, as these don’t seem to be hunted anymore in Iceland in contrast to fin whales, whom the article was about.

    Global fin whale population was estimated in 2018 by IUCN to have been around 100000.
    https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2478/50349982#population