Jump to content

npufal

Member
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  1. People have different needs. Not everyone needs/wants to have the most secure password in the world. I totally agree that, when talking about security, we need to be careful and should be mindful - in that regard I really doubt that since my first implementation here the workflow was generating a password that is below a minimum of what can be considered a good one. I totally appreciated deanishe feedback by the way - my focus was to go really simple so I started with rand() but as he reminded me SecureRandom is built into Ruby and offers a much better entropy level. Also, I never said my tool was the best, so I didn't get the comparison with the other post. I just said I wanted something simpler that fitted my needs. Programming is about trade offs, so there will never be such a thing as a silver bullet tool - it's up to the user to decide and it's up to us to clarify in which points our tool excels and in which it don't. Based on all the feedbacks I also updated my first post making it clear to the users that this workflow is not intended to offer optimal security
  2. Yeah, `SecureRandom` makes sense. I updated it - added more symbols, bumped to 15 the default length and I'm now using SecureRandom. Thanks for the feedback.
  3. You are totally right about the entropy, but my intent here was to keep it as simple as possible - it's not intended to be a security tool. I use 1Password to store all my passwords and if I'm looking for a really strong password I will just tailor a password recipe that fits my needs and will end up creating it there - that's what I meant by "as simple as possible". I personally don't see workflows as a way to accomplish complex tasks and/or the need for them to do it with the maximum excellence. The password generated by it might not be the strongest but neither it's the weakest - it's an average password that the user can quickly grab without thinking much. Your tool is very good by the way - it would be my choice if I were looking for something more robust.
  4. Description: I tried some of the current workflows that act as password generators but none of them were simple enough for my purpose so I came up with this one. From my perspective (and based on my needs) a password generation tool should be something straightforward - it doesn't need to require an active internet connection and doesn't need to offer complex options as the result. Having said that, this workflow doesn't aim to generate passwords that are the topmost in terms of security level - it tries to balance simplicity and performance with a good amount of security. Some output examples (using its default length): DeCW2V4SKBXWZVv 4s02A6M-uOsDA6ocGtrW8Hz-TssPaK As part of the password recipe I use symbols, lower/upper case letters and numbers. All of them are randomly mixed up. The default length is 15 (so you can just call `password` to generate a new password) but you can overwrite this config by passing in another number, e.g. `password 15`. The generated password will appear as part of a system notification and will be copied to the clipboard. Where: Either go to the Github project page or download the workflow from Packal Demonstration:
  5. I wonder if this is a bug or a missing feature. AFAIK when I enable "Full fuzzy match from word boundary" it will only affect searches for apps and not files, correct? I noticed I cannot make use of a fuzzy search when looking for files. For instance if I have a file named "translated_diploma" I cannot locate it by simply searching for "transdip". As of now Alfred will give me no results. Is this something that is planned for future releases? In my mind that is a big thing and would also be a huge advantage over Apple's Spotlight for users like me that use Alfred mostly as a search tool. Keep up the awesome work! Cheers, Nicholas
×
×
  • Create New...