Author Topic: Feature request  (Read 16743 times)

HappyPasswordMakerUser

  • Guest
Feature request
« on: June 02, 2007, 12:34:03 PM »
Hello,

I found your tool VERY valuable and useful for me. But I'm little scared about using portable JavaScript versions on untrusted computers, where browser can be bugged.
So my idea is to create Windows GUI version of PasswordMaker OR to create PasswordMaker vesion as plugin for KeePass (http://keepass.info/)

Offline Eric H. Jung

  • grimholtz
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Feature request
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2007, 05:24:22 PM »
Hi, glad to hear you like PasswordMaker. We have a Windows (and Linux) GUI version already. Miquel, you haven't released it yet? When's the release?

Offline tanstaafl

  • God Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
Re: Feature request
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2007, 05:32:15 PM »
??

Why not jut use PWM combined with Portable Firefox on a USB stick? Best of both worlds (portability *and* security)...

HappyPasswordMakerUser

  • Guest
Re: Feature request
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2007, 06:44:22 PM »
Combining PWM with KeePass gives more usability in ONE tool.

Offline tanstaafl

  • God Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
Re: Feature request
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2007, 06:49:33 PM »
KeePass looks interesting, but please provide details on how/why you think it is better than PWM?

They are really different tools - PWM doesn't *store* passwords anywhere... so I don't really see how you could turn it into a 'plug-in' to KeePass...

HappyPasswordMakerUser

  • Guest
Re: Feature request
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2007, 06:50:08 PM »
You mean Windows GUI version? Standalone EXE file? Where to get it?
Hi, glad to hear you like PasswordMaker. We have a Windows (and Linux) GUI version already. Miquel, you haven't released it yet? When's the release?

HappyPasswordMakerUser

  • Guest
Re: Feature request
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2007, 07:00:15 PM »
My idea is to provide PWM functionality to KeePass by implementing PWM as plugin-file for KeePass. And KeePass can't be better than PWM, because it can only generate totally random passphrases, without chance for reconstructing them in case of loss. I want use PWM as optional built-in password generator for KeePass.

KeePass looks interesting, but please provide details on how/why you think it is better than PWM?

They are really different tools - PWM doesn't *store* passwords anywhere... so I don't really see how you could turn it into a 'plug-in' to KeePass...

Offline tanstaafl

  • God Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
Re: Feature request
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2007, 07:15:22 PM »
Don't see it happening, unless you're willing to pay Eric to do it (assuming he is *willing* to do it)... I suggest you just pick one or the other.

Offline Eric H. Jung

  • grimholtz
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Feature request
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2007, 09:16:03 PM »
Quote from: HappyPasswordMakerUser
You mean Windows GUI version? Standalone EXE file? Where to get it?
Right now it's in Subversion (http://passwordmaker.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/passwordmaker/desktop%2Bqt/trunk/). Miquel hasn't released it as an .exe yet, but I don't know why... he probably thinks it's not ready.

Miquel? Any ETA for the desktop GUI edition?

Offline Eric H. Jung

  • grimholtz
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Feature request
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2007, 09:19:22 PM »
fyi, the .exe can be downloaded here:
http://passwordmaker.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/passwordmaker/desktop%2Bqt/trunk/passwordmaker.exe?view=log
but unless you run the installer and/or happen to have some dependent DLLs in the path, it's not going to work. Basically, it's not released yet... miquel?

edit: actually, if you "get" all the contents of that directory, you don't have to compile it...mingwm10.dll, etc. are in the same directory in Subversion so you can actually run it without running the installer. I'm doing so now.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2007, 09:20:59 PM by Eric H. Jung »

Offline tanstaafl

  • God Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
Re: Feature request
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2007, 10:36:55 PM »
Dang! I must have missed the conversation that sparked this most interesting development...

Can you point me to the thread or discussion about what it is intended to be? Is this [intended to be] a *full* standalone implementation?

Online Miquel 'Fire' Burns

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1154
  • Programmer
Re: Feature request
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2007, 03:17:04 AM »
Yes, a full stand alone edition, no dependencies on anything that's outside the package.

Anyway, there's some features I need to implement first before the first beta is release (exporting settings is one, then some things like clearing the password after a set time, entering the master password twice, etc.), once those are done, I'll release the first beta.
"I'm not drunk, just sleep deprived."

Offline Eric H. Jung

  • grimholtz
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Feature request
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2007, 05:02:30 PM »
Does it really need an export feature for a first release? The Yahoo! Widget and other editions don't export (yet). Some of the other editions don't even have double master-password entry IIRC. I'm not suggesting those things don't be implemented; I'm just suggesting a quicker release cycle--the agile, iterative approach instead of waterfall.

Offline tanstaafl

  • God Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
Re: Feature request
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2007, 06:56:49 PM »
Again - any pointer to features to expect?

Ie, will this work for HTTP Basic Auth dialogs? Will it still auto-populate on websites?

Offline Eric H. Jung

  • grimholtz
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3353
Re: Feature request
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2007, 08:28:44 PM »
I don't think Miquel and I were thinking this would support auto-populate. Were you, miquel? I wasn't. That would be quite a big effort. It's first incarnation is supposed to be like the yahoo! widget or java edition AFAIK.

PasswordMaker Forums

Re: Feature request
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2007, 08:28:44 PM »