this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
-19 points (27.9% liked)

Selfhosted

53627 readers
790 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So I'm using bit warden self hosted and now I'm freaking out about the very real possibility of my passwords getting stolen or lost in a fire. Having passwords on my phone makes no sense.

We need some sort of distributed password manager safety net. Like I keep your passwords safe if you keep mine. But how can I trust you? Can you trust me?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 15 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

So your solution to password theft is to make sure other people have them?

[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 20 hours ago

End passwordlessness.

[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

For a single password, it is indeed illogical to distribute it to others, in order to prevent it from being stolen and misused.

That said, the concept of distributing authority amongst others is quite sound. Instead of each owner having the whole secret, they only have a portion of it, and a majority of owners need to agree in order to combine their parts and use the secret. Rather than passwords, it's typically used for cryptographically signing off on something's authenticity (eg software updates), where it's known as threshold signatures:

Imagine for a moment, instead of having 1 secret key, you have 7 secret keys, of which 4 are required to cooperate in the FROST protocol to produce a signature for a given message. You can replace these numbers with some integer t (instead of 4) out of n (instead of 7).

This signature is valid for a single public key.

If fewer than t participants are dishonest, the entire protocol is secure.

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I remember learning about Shamir's secret sharing, and indeed the concept is fascinating. I’m not sure passwords is the best use case of something like that, but I’m not completely against it in theory.