We’re excited to announce to you all a new data partnership between Autonomi and FYEO, creators of KryptPass, a decentralized password manager.
KryptPass uses peer-to-peer WebRTC sync to securely transfer encrypted credentials between a user’s devices, avoiding centralized storage and reducing vulnerability points.
FYEO’s advanced identity monitoring. Embedded in KryptPass is FYEO Dark, a massive breach database with petabytes of data (over 29 billion leaked credential records), giving users real time detection of their compromised credentials.
Together, Autonomi and FYEO enhance digital security by combining KryptPass with Autonomi’s decentralized network, offering quantum-resistant storage that ensures data remains secure, even against future computing threats.
This partnership marks an important milestone following our early-phase launch on October 29.
Great step forward for team Autonomi! it’s a cool milestone that shows Autonomi is on the right track. Looking forward to more announcements like this over the coming months!
“Our proprietary next generation password management and identity monitoring and phishing alert system uses private-key cryptography to create a secure, accessible password management experience from start to finish.”
Could you link to the page where you got that, so I can have a look? Couldn’t find anything that clear when I was looking, and would like to investigate more.
Proprietary doesn’t seem to be in the spirit I would have thought standard for such a project. I would love to read more about their reasoning behind keeping the code hidden. They’d a blog post or two I saw about the dangers of “security through obscurity”, so they are aware that that doesn’t work, which is good, I suppose.
The ethos of the project has always been to protect it from VC and all other forms of malevolent centralisation. Each step away from that creates further risk.
Bait and switch follows like night and day in the corporate space, and one of the problems I see with even the most well meaning decentralisation projects, not least decentralised social media, is that we’re so steeped in the capitalist way of thinking we make fundamental errors. Things like this are a product of that complacency IMO, and we’d do better to be a bit more ideological, especially now the project has put such barriers in the way of the fundamentals that it is hard to imagine a route back to them.
Although you can argue that it’s now lost that and so this doesn’t matter, just the payoff now.
I’m not of that opinion, but then I’m not dependent on a financial payoff whereas I do understand many still put a lot of hope in that.
This argument could be made after literally any move made by Autonomi and partners. One can always shrug the shoulders and say “well, it’ll bring more people”. Yeah, sure, could be true, but it’s not the only criterion.
I am not interested in “a popular network”, leading to a great payout for early adopters and investors, if it doesn’t fulfill certain ethical and technical criteria we were long told were not up for debate. We already have a popular network called the internet, and surely we’re after more than just recreating a similar thing but with a new name, and a tasty profit for us.
Proprietary software is fundamentally against community, learning, sharing, and is unethical, in my eyes. Business and/or profit-oriented folk will say that it’s either a good, or a necessary evil, but the history of the hardware and software space has shown repeatedly that software being proprietary gives companies and developers unjust power over users, which very few seem to be able to resist abusing.
There are other ways for individuals and companies to make their living.
So, yes, I’m very sceptical of this company, not as happy about this announcement as I would have been if the company were openly committed to open source, and am eager to hear more about the company’s reasoning for this decision, future plans with the software, etc etc. I really searched quite thoroughly on their blog for any info and couldn’t find any mention of it.
Yes, and I don’t like the way it was presented as a voice of the whole community.
Personally, I prefer open source. But there is nothing wrong in partner using closed source, as long as they don’t get to decide the course of the development of the network itself.
Haha guys, for real we’ve wanted partners for years and the first one we got we’re actively blaming for not being open source.
Lets get off our high horses shall we and celebrate every company or person willing to bring value to the network.
We will have our voices heard by our actions, by using or not using products and services developed on the network. Want an open source password manager, start building, nothing is holding you back. (Except for api’s maybe )
But for the love of everything we hold dear, let’s stay the welcoming and open minded community we’ve always been.
I can assure you that I will continue to politely voice any ethical concerns I have, as long as I think there’s still hope for the project providing something even somewhat similar to the original vision.
It wasn’t in any way intended as such, and I don’t know how anyone could read it that way. I’ll make sure and explicitly state that my opinions are my own in the future from time to time. Anyone else misreading me the same way, allow me to state - my opinions are my own, and I do not claim to or pretend to represent the community as a whole in any sense.
To me, being “welcoming” and “open minded” does not mean not voicing concerns when we have them. If you want to see choruses of people saying only positive things to everything, you’ve got a very different view of “community” to me. I don’t post “negative” things for no reason, but out of concern for the project.
I stated my views above politely and clearly and won’t repeat them again, if the matter is ignored I’ll be dropping it.
[EDIT: combined a couple of replies rather than doing several comments]
Hi @Dimitar - we plan to open source the client in 2025. We just released about a month ago in open beta and are still testing key features before we move to open source.
Hi Jay,
We are openly committed to open source. We plan to open source the client in 2025. I answered above and on twitter but just making sure I reply here too. We just opened beta about a month ago, we are still testing and improving and then will be moving to open source the client in 2025. We built KryptPass to be a free solution for people to control their own credentials. Open source is part of that and is coming.
How do we pay the bills, the next question will be. FYEO is a security audit company. We have peformed over 300 audits on L1s and L2s since 2018. We plan to open source the KryptPass client. Eventually if the community wants it could we build premium features on top of it? Sure, if that’s what people want, but we are tired of password managers being centralized, and being something that people have to pay for to merely access and store their credentials. This is a move to make password management like a crypto wallet. Self-custody of your stuff.
I hope that answers and feel free to reach out with any other questions. We are very excited to work with Autonomi initially and as we grow.
we’ve wanted partners for years and the first one we got we’re actively blaming for not being open source.
)
% open source next year: