On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Matthieu Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > One thing though: I don't see the need for "pass cp". What is the use > case where you need a second identical password but with a different > identifier? Moreover, both passwords would have identical ciphertexts, > meaning that if you crack password A you get password B for free (if you > encrypt the same cleartext twice, you get two differnt ciphertexts, but > in the case of "pass cp" you would obviously have the same ciphertext).
Adding "pass cp" would not make sense for other reasons, which points to a problem with the current mv implementation: different directories might have different .gpg-ids, which means those passwords are expected to be encrypted for different recipients. A proper pass mv needs to reencrypt. I'll see about fixing this up later today. Likewise, a "pass cp" would need to do the same, but then it's just the same as "pass show Old | pass insert -m New"... So in fact, perhaps a proper implementation of both cp and mv would really just be the above pipe, or the above pipe plus a removal... _______________________________________________ Password-Store mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/password-store
