Windows Defender detects 7zr.exe as PUP malware.
I must support Andrei in his views on the matter. Currently if we use multiple platforms, we're required to miss out on OTPs on one of the platforms, unless a plugin like KeeOtp is utilized with KeePass 2. Utilizing plugins increase the chance of vulnerabilities or malicious actions by their authors, I don't like the approach of using plugins for functionality that'd benefit a large portion of the user base. Supporting otpauth would also make the data more portable.
I had not hoped you as a developer had audited it, but maybe someone in the community had looked through it. Thanks.
I find the functionality extension that KeeOtp2 gives worth using a plugin, but has anyone audited the plugin (from a malicious standpoint)? I want to use it, but I don't want to trust anything when it comes to a password manager where a single malicious program can ruin a users life. If KeeOtp2 is trusted, would it expose anything in memory which could compromise secrets? My understanding is that KeePass 2 is hardened against things being exposed in memory. This is less of a concern as long as it...
What a dumb comment, you get 7-Zip for free and post crap like this? Why don't you just choose an alternative instead of spreading negative rubbish?
What a dumb comment, you get 7-Zip for free and post crap like this? Why don't you just chose an alternative instead of spreading negative rubbish?
The program should not have any internet capabilities in my opinion.
Your comment seems very aggressive towards Kenji Mouri for no reason. He does great work with NanaZip and is very willing to cooperate, do work to make patches upstream compatible and more. Both 7-Zip and Nanazip are still very fast and sleek.
Notepad++ has now integrated into the Windows 11 context menu properly. I'll leave some links below, I hope they can be of help. https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/issues/13320 https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/pull/13389
So if I understand correctly it only lowers security to 'iteration count - 1'. If I use 30 iterations it doesn't matter if it's 29 in reality as long as other potential vulnerabilities haven't been added with the Argon2id method.
So if I understand correctly it only lowers security to 'iteration count - 1'. If I use 30 iterations it doesn't matter if it's really only 29 in reality as long as other potential vulnerabilities haven't been added with the Argon2id method.
So if I understand correctly it only lowers security to 'iteration count - 1'. If I use 30 iterations it doesn't matter if it's really only 29 in reality as long as other potential vulnerabilities haven't been added with the Argon2id method.
So if I understand correctly it only lowers security to 'iteration count - 1'. If I use 30 iterations it doesn't matter if it's really only 29 as long as other potential vulnerabilities haven't been added with the Argon2id method.
As far as I understand from the documentation, Argon2id only uses the Argon2i variant on the first iteration, and all subsequent iterations use Argon2d, is this right? I just want to be sure as resistance to offline cracking is more important, but if using a high iteration count instead of a really high memory amount, the difference between A2d and A2id becomes negligible, if I understand correctly. The extra safety from potential future attacks is good in my opinion.
Hello Igor. Have you thought about adding recovery data to recover 7z archives that become corrupted? It's a nice feature in WinRAR and currently I'm forced to use Par2 with 7z which I'd like to avoid for the future.
Could there be added a continue button to the prompt warning of many spaces indicating a potential virus? Or make a toggle in settings so we get a button to continue. I work with a lot of zip files generated by a third party that puts many spaces in file names for some reason, and 7-zip always prevent me from opening the files directly as it can be an indication of a virus.
To anyone stumbling upon this in the future. The file to modify is in C:\Users\%UserProfile%\AppData\Roaming\KeePass. Once again thanks for the answers!
To anyone stumbling upon this in the future. The file to modify is in C:\Users\%UserProfile%\AppData\Roaming\KeePass.
Thank you a ton for the answer. I have been trying for some time now but I can't figure out exactly how I need to put the information in the config file for 'AutoTypeInterKeyDelay'. Do I need to create the nodes? And what is the value name I should enter? And is it in the file "KeePass.exe.config" or "KeePass.config"?
Is there a way to increase the speed of auto-type or a plugin of sorts? On Mac I use KeePassXC and the auto-type is much faster, so much so that it feels a bit slow with KeePass 2.
I understand, change just requires adaptation. Thanks for the great software.
Hi Igor. Thanks a lot for a release build with the newer code! I'm very happy that I can still put the "CRC SHA" menu into the root of the context menu, feared for a second that wasn't possible. Is it somehow possible to make 7zip->CRC SHA show the hash with upper case letters like in 19,00 instead of the new lower case letters? I find it harder to quickly look at hashes when they're lower case like now. I can't see any setting in 7zip to change it, so maybe a registry change or other options?
Thanks for the answers, I guess I'll continue to use my phone for TOTP as the {TIMEOTP} method isn't too pleasant. In case I do have a change of mind, will plugins generate any data in the KeePass database which can have incompatibility with forks like KeePassXC or give corruption of the DB? Thanks a lot for your answers, help and development of KeePass :)
It'd be really useful but I don't like relying on a plugin that could some day break or introduce vulnerabilities. I know forks of KeePass has it implemented but I just really like KeePass 2 compared with forks.
Great to see this version is upgraded to beta status!
Ohh sorry! I don't know how I missed that as I've followed here for some time, clearly not good enough though.
Hi Igor. I've waited a long time with updating from 19.00 as all never versions are classified as alpha's. Is it safe to use these alpha versions or is there a bigger possibility of erros in the alpha versions compared to release versions? Normally beta software can be fine but since errors could potentially equal lost data I'm a little more careful. Thanks.
I don't believe this would be a good change, I use the CRC often and adding extra steps to such actions is always bad, although I have no idea how often this feature is used. An option would be good, as options always are, but I wonder if that is something Igor would consider.
I've recently changed a bunch of entries as I kept important information in notes, but learned this wasn't secure so I've put the information in string fields instead. To my question now, is entry history encrypted when the DB is open like passwords and string fields, or is it readable in memory like notes are? In case it's unencrypted, I'd need to delete entry history too. Also, is there a way to make attachments encrypted in memory until they're opened, or would I need to encrypt the files myself?...
I've recently changed a bunch of entries as I kept important information in notes, but learned this wasn't secure so I've put the information in string fields instead. My question now is, is entry history encrypted when the DB is open like passwords and string fields, or is it readable in memory like notes are? In case it's unencrypted, I'd need to delete entry history too. Also, is there a way to make attachments encrypted in memory until they're opened, or would I need to encrypt the files myself?...
I've recently changed a bunch of entries as I kept important information in notes, but learned this wasn't secure so I've put the information in string fields instead. My question now is, are entry history encrypted when the DB is open like passwords and string fields, or is it readable in memory like notes are? In case it's unencrypted, I'd need to delete entry history too. Also, is there a way to make attachments encrypted in memory until they're opened, or would I need to encrypt the files myself?...
Is it recommended to use these alpha version normally, or are they only for testing?
Is this really not an option? It would make great sense to be able to see size of files and folders in KB, MB and/or GB. It's my only annoyance with 7zip. Everytime, I have to right click and check properties or look in explorer, an extra step that could be avoided. It could even be made as simple as "2 011 930 (1,90 MB)".
Is this really not an option? It would make great sense to be able to see size of files and folders in KB, MB and/or GB. It's my only annoyance with 7zip. Everytime, I have to right click and check properties or look in explorer, an extra step that could be avoided.
Here is the benchmark results for a 3900X with 32GB of ram.