Default Profiles

[tanstaafl]

I understand. You can add it as "Multiple usernames per account, specified by pattern".

Ok, but... I don't want to complicate this, but at the same time, there are a couple of questions on how it should work...

Ie... what about the 'Use the following text'... should this be on a per pattern basis too? Optional?

The potential problem is, if the same 'Use the following text' is used for all, and more than one pattern uses the same username, the password for those would be the same. I wouldn't want that.

Should you simply hard code this option so that if a pattern-specific username is specified, it automatically uses the TLD for that matched pattern? Or should this be optional?

[tanstaafl]

I understand. You can add it as "Multiple usernames per account, specified by pattern".

Done...

Added a vote from Kevin and waily...

[tanstaafl]

Should you simply hard code this option so that if a pattern-specific username is specified, it automatically uses the TLD for that matched pattern? Or should this be optional?

Or, maybe, should we consider just totally moving the current username and 'Use the following text...' fields into the pattern totally? The only exception would be the 'Defaults' Account... I think it would make sense, if you implement this, but maybe I haven't considered all of the ramifications.

And honestly - the more I think about this idea, the more I like it. It will dramatically reduce the number of Accounts I have now - by as much as 90%. I can see going from 100+ down to less than 10. And the RDF file should be much smaller, due to the reduced duplication of settings, since all of my accounts share one of 8 or 10 settings configs.

Question: will this have any impact (negative or positive) on performance? Meaning, will it be faster or slower to search the patterns, as opposed to the Accounts the way they are now?

[Eric H. Jung]

Question: will this have any impact (negative or positive) on performance? Meaning, will it be faster or slower to search the patterns, as opposed to the Accounts the way they are now?

Definite negative performance hit, although it might not be noticeable unless you had hundreds of patterns. I have no idea without some benchmarking.

what about the 'Use the following text'... should this be on a per pattern basis too? Optional?

You can go crazy and say that all fields, including the ones on the Extended tab (e.g., modifier) should work based on patterns. I think we'll end up complicating the UI and general usability significantly by doing this.

[tanstaafl]

Ok, then, two good reasons not to do it... 

One thing though... how much work is the sorting stuff going to be? One thing that I liked about this idea was it would lessen the number of accounts - but the real problem I have is not really the number of accounts, it is the inability to sort them easily. Mine are a mess, and trying to sort using the broken way it works is royally frustrating.

Obviously this is only a real problem for those of us who have a lot of accounts, but hey - we're users too...

We really need to get sorting working, even if it is a simple click/select, then 'Move Up' or 'Move Down' buttons. Drag-n-Drop would be nice, but not a requirement...

[waily]

OK. Now I get some idea about 'Multiple Usernames per account, by pattern'

My original idea is to add another account with the 'Url Components' just like default account had plus 'Use the following text ...... ' as fifth option.  However after reading these messages I found I might misunderstand the meaning of 'pattern based'.

Back to original situation I illustrate, the idea is let the 'using text' can be calculated and populated automatically from current website's url on not default account just like default account does. And also if someone want to type the specified 'using text', he can also check the 'five' checkbox (default account have four checkbox) for that specified account and password will be generated by  calculating that text plus other four optons if selected when the url patterns match.

At this point, I don't mention about username. And if someone have two usernames for a specified website, then he will get the same password since 'using text' calculated and auto populated from same website. If he want two different password for the same website, he need to create another account.

Above is my original idea and since it only add 'Url Components' to not default account, it might cost less programming effort and can have different password for different website.

---------

Now take usernames into consideration. It's a many (usernames) to many(websites) situation. Let me illustrate if this is what 'Multiple Usernames per account, by pattern' says.

someone have five useranmes on google, yahoo, as following
username   site
A          google   
AA         google
AAA        google
A          yahoo
AAA        yahoo

With only one account to handle these usernames, add url pattern as following
'*google.com*', '*yahoo.com*'.

When type 'alt+`' on google.com, passwordmaker will popup a window with three choices 'A', 'AA', 'AAA', select one and type master password to generate the password.

on yahoo.com, will popup a window with two choices, 'A', 'AAA'.

The implementation is to keep the username-site 'table' into that account. Master password can be saved in memory, however, each time we need to select a specified username to login on these websites.

However, I think it is hard to manage this account since it can have multiple usernames and multiple website. for example, how to 'name' this account ? 'Google+Yahoo' ? "A+B usernames" ?

Kevin's 'inheritance' will make accounts much complicate, too.

---------

Although it is possible for a person to have two usernames on one website just like google, yahoo. Most of us still using only one username for one website. And if I am correct, most of us 'try to' use the same username for these websites as following.

username   site
A          investment
A          sports
A          health
AB         company (oh, someone took A, I can only take 'AB' as my username)
AB         club (oh, someone took A, since I have 'AB' for another website,
                 I'd like to choose 'AB' as my username)

How about using my original idea ?
Create one account, check 'Domain', in 'Extented' tab 'Username' field type 'A', add url pattern 'investment', 'sports', 'health'.
Create second account, check 'Domain', in 'Extented' tab 'Username' field type 'AB', add url pattern 'company', 'club'.

When login 'investment', generate password from 'investment'+'A'.
When login 'club', generate password from 'club'+'AB'.
Above two situation can be easy type 'alt+`' without additional username selecting.

With only two accounts (as different usernames), one can handle many different websites.

[tanstaafl]

My original idea is to add another account with the 'Url Components' just like default account had plus 'Use the following text ...... ' as fifth option.

I don't understand... you can put whatever you wantg into the 'Using text...' field - adding the ability to customize it with checkboxes adds a lot of complexity with no benefit.

Either I'm missing something, or you are...

Back to original situation I illustrate, the idea is let the 'using text' can be calculated and populated automatically from current website's url on not default account just like default account does. And also if someone want to type the specified 'using text', he can also check the 'five' checkbox (default account have four checkbox) for that specified account and password will be generated by  calculating that text plus other four optons if selected when the url patterns match.

Again - you can ALREADY DO THIS - just enter whatever it is that you want to match on for that account in the 'Use the folloiwng text...' box when you create the account... done...

Above is my original idea and since it only add 'Url Components' to not default account, it might cost less programming effort and can have different password for different website.

This is what you cannot currently do.

This discussion boils down to a matter of HOW to use PWM:

1. One Account per username/'Use the following text...' combo, or

2. Account > One Pattern per username/'Use the following text...' combo

Currently, you must do it the first way. It works now.

What has been requested is to ADD the ability to use different username/'Use the following text...' values on a per PATTERN basis. Eric has said that doing so will have a NEGATIVE impact on performance, and on that basis alone I am against adding this functionality. He also mentions the 'slippery slope' problem, and he is right... there will always be someone who wants one or more of the other fields to be included...

I really like the concept - it would dramatically increase the flexibility of PWM - but the bottom line is, you can accomplish the same behavior simply by adding a separate ACCOUNT, so it really doesn't matter...

With only two accounts (as different usernames), one can handle many different websites.

You may be interested in an existing Feature Request for a New 'Default' and 'Advanced' Security Modes that will provide this type of functionality... essentially, you could add the TLD of the sites in question, and because this new 'Default' security mode would cause the 'Calculated URL' to be used for generating the password - NOT what is in the 'Use the following text...' field - you would get a different password for each site.

[tanstaafl]

Hey Eric,

Please read this carefully - and please re-read my FR referenced below (you still haven't ever weighed in on it)...

what about the 'Use the following text'... should this be on a per pattern basis too? Optional?

You can go crazy and say that all fields, including the ones on the Extended tab (e.g., modifier) should work based on patterns. I think we'll end up complicating the UI and general usability significantly by doing this.

Hmmm... after my revelation that my FR for a New 'Default' and 'Advanced' Security Modes was missing a critical point that made it unclear as to one of the biggest benefits (I have updated it to clarify this), and giving this further thought, I'll now make the following argument...

There are only TWO Default fields (meaning, fields other than a Custom field that is added through the 'Advanced Auto-Populate' Tab) that are actually populated on a web form/site: username, and password.

For this reason, it makes sense to add the username field to the pattern list because it is the ONLY other field that is:

Site-Specific,
Used for Password Calculation, and
Actually populated on a form.

If the above referenced FR were implemented, as well as the ability to add an optional username that would be used both for password calculation - wow... this would be huge, imnsho...

[waily]

My original idea is to add another account with the 'Url Components' just like default account had plus 'Use the following text ...... ' as fifth option.

I don't understand... you can put whatever you wantg into the 'Using text...' field - adding the ability to customize it with checkboxes adds a lot of complexity with no benefit.

Either I'm missing something, or you are...

Back to original situation I illustrate, the idea is let the 'using text' can be calculated and populated automatically from current website's url on not default account just like default account does. And also if someone want to type the specified 'using text', he can also check the 'five' checkbox (default account have four checkbox) for that specified account and password will be generated by  calculating that text plus other four optons if selected when the url patterns match.

Again - you can ALREADY DO THIS - just enter whatever it is that you want to match on for that account in the 'Use the folloiwng text...' box when you create the account... done...

Above is my original idea and since it only add 'Url Components' to not default account, it might cost less programming effort and can have different password for different website.

Huh, maybe I don't explain it clearly ... the key is 'automatic'

What I want is 'automatic' populate the url's Domain (the third option) into password calculation for 'not default account'. The benefit is you can use only one 'not default account' to login different website with different generated password.

Current passwordmaker if we need to generate different password for different website, we need to create each account and type each 'Use the following text ...' one by one manually.

Why not use default account ? Because each website have different password rule and maybe divide into two group, one for default and the others for the reset or, even more group of password rules.

Why I want this feature ? Because I don't want to create so many accounts to generate different password for each website. I don't want to type the 'Using the following ...' for these websites (I may typo, oh no, I can't get the password next time I fix the correct text !).

And for "per username/'Use the following text...' combo", it will make that account
much difficult to describe and uneasy to manage, and with any kind of implementation, you will still need to select the specified username. However, with current implementation, we can assign each account by username, the username describe itself. Moreover, if only one username used for a specified website, with master password store in memory, simply 'alt+`' will put the username and password for you!

Back to performance issue, since it only copy the four option from default, others remain the same with current passwordmaker, I think this is not going to impact the performance.

[tanstaafl]

Huh, maybe I don't explain it clearly ... the key is 'automatic'

What I want is 'automatic' populate the url's Domain (the third option) into password calculation for 'not default account'. The benefit is you can use only one 'not default account' to login different website with different generated password.

Right... but there is really no difference between doing this via a separate URL pattern, or via a separate account - it is more a matter of IMPLEMENTATION.

As I said - You CAN ALREADY DO THIS - but yes, you have to create a separate ACCOUNT for each site, rather than creating a separate URL PATTERN in a single ACCOUNT. Either way, you have to create SOMETHING.

Current passwordmaker if we need to generate different password for different website, we need to create each account and type each 'Use the following text ...' one by one manually.

Yep - and if what you are suggesting was implemented, you would have to add a different URL pattern for each, MANUALLY.

As I said, I do like the idea, but it isn't what I would call critical, because there is a very usable workaround.

Why not use default account ? Because each website have different password rule and maybe divide into two group, one for default and the others for the reset or, even more group of password rules.

Right again - this is WHY you have different accounts - to handle the different rules. All you are talking about is turning PWM on its head, and using the URL Patterns instead of Accounts to manage things.

6 to one, half-dozen to another...

Why I want this feature ? Because I don't want to create so many accounts to generate different password for each website.

So instead of having to create so many accounts, you would have to create so many URL patterns.

Again - 6 to one, half-dozen to another.

I don't want to type the 'Using the following ...' for these websites (I may typo, oh no, I can't get the password next time I fix the correct text !).

It is automatically populated for you if you create the new Account while on the site in question...

And for "per username/'Use the following text...' combo", it will make that account
much difficult to describe and uneasy to manage, and with any kind of implementation, you will still need to select the specified username. However, with current implementation, we can assign each account by username, the username describe itself. Moreover, if only one username used for a specified website, with master password store in memory, simply 'alt+`' will put the username and password for you!

Again - I don't really see the issue. One way or another, you have to add the criteria for recognizing each account

And again - if you go read it, you will see that if the New 'Default' and 'Advanced' Security Modes feature is implemented, it will do everything you want...

[tanstaafl]

By the way - as I said before, I do understand the benefit to what you are suggesting, and even like the idea - but it simply isn't necessary to accomplish your end result. Once you have set up the Accounts, it all 'just works'.

[waily]

By the way - as I said before, I do understand the benefit to what you are suggesting, and even like the idea - but it simply isn't necessary to accomplish your end result. Once you have set up the Accounts, it all 'just works'.

OK, currently we need to create many accounts for these situations.

All I illustrate is just an example for minimum effort (my guess, maybe not correct) to accomplish these features. though it may need to think much deeper than simply end this way.

[tanstaafl]

By the way - as I said before, I do understand the benefit to what you are suggesting, and even like the idea - but it simply isn't necessary to accomplish your end result. Once you have set up the Accounts, it all 'just works'.

OK, currently we need to create many accounts for these situations.

Or many Patterns - as I said, either way, you have to create SOMETHING...

All I illustrate is just an example for minimum effort (my guess, maybe not correct) to accomplish these features. though it may need to think much deeper than simply end this way.

No worries - I do appreciate your thoughts - and in fact you've given me another idea, but I'll have to think on it some...