PasswordMaker Forums
Firefox/SeaMonkey/Mozilla/Netscape/Flock Browser Extension => Feature Requests / Enhancements => Topic started by: ThorNM on July 19, 2005, 06:59:12 PM
-
Hi,
This is a great program/extension, but one thing that frustrates me is, well, my inability to type properly. I'll often mistype my master password which is only asked for once.
Is a confirmation box for the master password possible? I've generated passwords before, only to go back to the site in question and realize that the master password was typed incorrectly in the first place.
Thanks! Any hints on avoiding this issue for now?
-
Hi ThorNM,
That's a great idea, and I will make it an option in the next release. For the moment, I suggest you save the master password to disk--then you don't have to worry about mistyping it.
FYI, an older release of PasswordMaker actually had the master password field display its value w/o asterisks.
Regards,
Eric
-
It would be quite great to add an option in the global settings to disable the confirmation box. So I don't have to type it a second time when I'm sure i always type it the right way ;)
So you can enable it when you have to add a new account, so I you can be sure it's the right one and you can disable it, when you just want to have access to accounts and you don't mistype it.
-
Eric,
It looks like Nobody has good ideas :hehe: . IMHO, this would be a good feature to have in the next release.
Romeo
-
Sounds good. Tyrantmizar, can you add it to the feature request list? Something like "Option to enable/disable master password confirmation"
Thanks,
Eric
-
Got it.
-
AHHHHHHHHHH!!!
Please give me the option to take out the confirmation box! Very annoying!!
How can I load up a past release until this is fixed?
-
ah, nevermind I found the past release. Please make the confirmation an option though, forcing it is too much.
-
There will be a global option to enable/disable this feature in a future release. It will be disabled by default.
Tyrantmizar, can you add it to the list if it's not already there? (I think it is)
-
How about instead of making it an option, make it optional? E.g. allow empty values for the second password field, but if its not empty, check it matches.
I'll exlpain why it'll be useful for me.. Whenever I'm logging into existing accounts, I prefer not to have a confirmation.. (btw, I store my master in the memory). If my login works, then I know my master password was correct and can freely create new accounts on other sites without have to re-type the master password. However, if the first thing I do in a browsing session is create a new account, then I'd like the peace of mind of having the master password confirmed.
For the time being, if I ever want to skip the confirmation I just open up passwordmaker and type the password in there.
-
That's an excellent idea. I will probably implement all three options:
1. Confirmation required
2. Check confirmation only if non-empty
3. No confirmation
-
Sounds good :)
-
That's an excellent idea. I will probably implement all three options:
1. Confirmation required
2. Check confirmation only if non-empty
3. No confirmation
is this still going to be implemented? I'd really like to see it..
-
I implemented #1 and #3 (see checkbox on global settings tab), but unfortunately I'm not going to be able to do #2. Is that critical for you?
-
I implemented #1 and #3 (see checkbox on global settings tab), but unfortunately I'm not going to be able to do #2. Is that critical for you?
Till now I've been changing the source to add an extra check (masterPasswordTB2.value != "") before it confirms the passwords are equal.. its no big deal, i can just continue to do that whenever i upgrade :)
-
If you can elaborate on the changes you're making (source and line numbers, etc), I'll consider it.
-
I just changed line 24 of passwordprompt.js from this:
if (confirmationDeck.selectedIndex == "1" && masterPasswordTB1.value != masterPasswordTB2.value) {
to this:if (masterPasswordTB2.value != "" && confirmationDeck.selectedIndex == "1" && masterPasswordTB1.value != masterPasswordTB2.value) {
although.. its only this simple if you dont make an option for it..
-
Right. The GUI and persistence to the RDF make it a just a little more work :)