Re: Remplacement for zsafe on wheezy

Sorry for this late response.

I finally used fpm2, because I use mate desktop and fpm2 is on gtk so it give me a better integration.

fpm2 have less option than Keepassx, but have they I need.

I use only Debian, so I don't care if it doesn't work on Windows or Mac :)

fpm2 use also aes encryption, I think security is the same with the same encryption.

Thanks you all

2013/6/7 Tyler D <tdowg1@gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Mérof 42 <merof42@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks you both, I'm going to test it.
> It seem to be better than zsafe, with more options.
> I just dislike qt library, but is a different story
>
> A question about keepassx, I saw it use AES 256bits to store password, is my
> password safe if somebody steal my laptop per example?
> Off course I plan to use a sufficient strong master password.
> I'm not really familiar with encryption, and I don't know witch encryption
> provide sufficient security.

Another recommendation for KeePassX from me as well. It works on
Linux, Mac, and Windows. That was one of the more important selling
points for me.

As far as the safety of a KeePassX database goes, I think you are
fine. I too am not a mathematical computer wizard of science theory,
so I suggest this post:
http://serverfault.com/questions/51895/are-128-and-256bit-aes-encryption-considered-weak

I also wanted to point out that you can set up a two-factor
authentication scheme. Meaning, in addition to requiring that a
password (something you know) be supplied, you can also require that a
key file (something you have) be specified. That doesn't really have
to do with security (your "sufficient security") but rather
authentication. Since there can be an additional authentication
factor, the likelihood of someone being able to brute force their way
in to your password database are made lower.