With a master password, Firefox must be running with your master password entered, or your master password must be stolen with a key logger. But local access could be any program running as your user account, or any Firefox add-on, as discussed above. Considering the encryption discussed above, Mozilla never has your password data in usable form.
In a sense, yes, local access is needed.LastPass has had at least two breaches I've heard about, whereas Mozilla has had none I know about. As for user security, I think LastPass supports 2-factor authentication, so they may even get the win in security, if you use that feature. synchronized bookmarks, saved browsing history, etc.) I don't think anyone is really qualified to compare security practices between the two, unless they've done pen-testing with both or something. Of course if the break into Mozilla they'll get a lot more information than just passwords (e.g. Without a master password, Mozilla still encrypts your passwords using your sync account password, so even if data is stolen from Mozilla's servers, your passwords should be as safe, if your Sync password is strong. You encrypt locally, so anyone breaking into the server will need to break your master password to read any login credentials. As far as I can tell, the security model is about the same, if you use a master password.They all get saved to the same place and they all get synchronized if you turn the option on. Synchronized passwords are no different from other saved passwords. It would not be hard to also scrape text from password fields. Regardless, even without this ability, addons often use access to website content to do same legitimate task. I'm not really sure why this is part of your question. You yourself are using an add-on that can save, read, and edit passwords.
0 kommentar(er)
