Submit portable freeware that you find here. It helps if you include information like description, extraction instruction, Unicode support, whether it writes to the registry, and so on.
LazLock (https://www.cpunk-security.com/lazlock2.html) looks interesting, not least because it's multi-platform FOSS (Linux and Windows, ATM), claims portability, and it's always good to have worthy alternatives in the area -- should more established names like KeePass become unavailable all of a sudden...
https://www.cpunk-security.com/lazlock2.html wrote:Safely store and manage all credentials associated with your banking, media, email, social networks, education or work accounts. LazLock includes a password generator which allows you to create more secure passwords. A plain text version of your data is never written to disk, all decryption is done in memory. LazLock is portable, no installation is required, so it can be run from a USB drive.
Midas wrote:... looks interesting, not least because it's multi-platform FOSS (Linux and Windows, ATM), claims portability, and it's always good to have worthy alternatives in the area -- should more established names like KeePass become unavailable all of a sudden...
Good suggestion. I've been dragging my feet on a password manager for a while now, but my account/password list is getting way out of control so this might become necessary.
I tested LazLockversion2.6- it seems portable and stealth- no settings are saved, just the database file- lazlock.vault in LLdata sub-folder inside program folder.
smaragdus wrote:KeePass becoming unavailable- this is not very probable- an open source program is hard to get obliterated, even TrueCrypt still lives.
TrueCrypt is precisely the example I had in mind when I wrote that...
I strongly disagree with saying that AES-128 is broken, in any way, shape or form, and likewise ECC with 256-bit keys. Note that even in this answer by @kelaka regarding AES-128, you would need over 34 million years of the entire bitcoin mining power to carry out a computation of 2128. This is far from broken. If quantum computers ever happen at scale, it is very very unclear how long it would have to actually run to achieve 264 quantum computations for AES-128 (but ECC-256 would be in bigger trouble). Bottom line, these are far from broken. (I don't know what Schneier quote you are referring to, but anyway I completely disagree.)
A far greater security risk is the choice of a weak password.