| 1 |
On 28 Nov 2009, at 22:03, Dale wrote: |
| 2 |
> ... |
| 3 |
> And to think I came here to ask others opinion BEFORE doing this. I |
| 4 |
> was curious as to how this could work myself and if they can be |
| 5 |
> trusted, or SHOULD be trusted. Seems everyone thinks no one should. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Everyone's yakking it up because it makes them look clever. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
There's no reason encrypted data can't be stored on the server, then |
| 11 |
decrypted client-side in the web-browser or by using Java (or possibly |
| 12 |
even Javascript). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
That's not saying it IS secure, just that such an infrastructure |
| 15 |
should be possible, as much as we consider things like ssh, https &c |
| 16 |
to be "secure". |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The "Why LastPass is safe" page <https://lastpass.com/safety.php> is |
| 19 |
indeed bullet-points for idiots, and if that was the only information |
| 20 |
available on the site then I, too, might be more suspicious. If you |
| 21 |
look at the "Technology" summary on the site it looks far more |
| 22 |
reasonable: <https://lastpass.com/technology.php>. Perhaps some other |
| 23 |
commenters should have read this before posting? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Would I trust LastPass with child porn or incriminating information |
| 26 |
regarding my plans to overthrow the government? |
| 27 |
No, I really think not. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Would I trust it with my bank details and my Slashdot password? |
| 30 |
Why not? Those really aren't valuable enough to be worth hacking and |
| 31 |
SSL, AES & RSA ought to be plenty enough to secure them. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Stroller. |
Archives