Instance methods Instances of Models are documents. Documents have many of their own built-in instance methods. We may also define our own custom document instance methods. // define a schema const animalSchema = new Schema({ name: String, type: String }, { // Assign a function to the "methods" object of our animalSchema through schema options. // By following this approach, there is no need to create a separate TS type to define the type of the instance functions. methods: { findSimilarTypes(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); } } }); // Or, assign a function to the "methods" object of our animalSchema animalSchema.methods.findSimilarTypes = function(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); }; Now all of our animal instances have a findSimilarTypes method available to them. const Animal = mongoose.model('Animal', animalSchema); const dog = new Animal({ type: 'dog' }); dog.findSimilarTypes((err, dogs) => { console.log(dogs); // woof }); Overwriting a default mongoose document method may lead to unpredictable results. See this for more details. The example above uses the Schema.methods object directly to save an instance method. You can also use the Schema.method() helper as described here. Do not declare methods using ES6 arrow functions (=>). Arrow functions explicitly prevent binding this, so your method will not have access to the document and the above examples will not work.

less secure sign-in technology

To help keep your account secure, from May 30, 2022, ​​Google no longer supports the use of third-party apps or devices which ask you to sign in to your Google Account using only your username and password.

To keep your account more secure, Gmail no longer supports third-party apps or devices which require you to share your Google username and password. Sharing your account credentials with third-parties makes it easier for hackers to gain access to your account.

I sign in with my Google account everywhere I can to avoid having yet another password on another random website.

Password fatigue is real, and besides the inherent vulnerability of password logins, the idea of remembering yet another password puts users off registering for additional sites.

We recommend using both an issuer label prefix and an issuer parameter, described below.

If you send links with a secret login token with email, then they should be single-use and expire rather quickly.

If the link can only be used once with a short expiry time and no info in the link can be used to derive secrets in the session it creates then you should be fine. Effectively, the link serves as an one-time password.

If so, then how is sending a link for password reset any more secure? Isn't logging-in using a magic link the same thing as sending a magic link for resetting a password?

A given secret from an authenticator SHALL be used successfully only once.

For look-up secrets that have less than 64 bits of entropy, the verifier SHALL implement a rate-limiting mechanism that effectively limits the number of failed authentication attempts that can be made on the subscriber’s account as described in Section 5.2.2.

We now take an opinionated stance on which second factor you should set up first – you'll no longer be asked to choose between SMS or setting up an authenticator app (known as TOTP), and instead see the TOTP setup screen immediately when first setting up 2FA.

If you use a third party password manager, you might not realize that modern browsers have password management built in with a beautiful UX. Frankly, it’s harder to not use it.

If you’re a security conscious user... You don’t need SMS-2FA. You can use unique passwords, this makes you immune to credential stuffing and reduces the impact of phishing. If you use the password manager built in to modern browsers, it can effectively eliminate phishing as well.

Fortunately, we found RingCaptcha (https://ringcaptcha.com), which has a the 'starter plan' that offers free 500 OTP monthly. Just a small plug for them for providing freemium service; they are highly reliable because they are integrated with all major global, and regional providers, e.g., Twilio, Nexmo, Infobip, MessageBird, etc., and send your OTP through the best provider/route based on country/phone carrier, and can auto fallback to alternative paths. This means you just need to integrate with RingCaptcha, without the headache of deciding which SMS/voice OTP provider has best combination of price and reliability, which is a real headache when you are sending OTP world-wide.

One-time passwords are generated on demand by a dedicated OATH OTP authenticator that encapsulates a secret that was previously shared with the verifier. Using the authenticator, the claimant generates an OTP using a cryptographic method. The verifier also generates an OTP using the same cryptographic method. If the two OTP values match, the verifier can conclude that the claimant possesses the shared secret.

The verifier MUST NOT accept the second attempt of the OTP after the successful validation has been issued for the first OTP, which ensures one-time only use of an OTP.

Take a moment to consider the alternative. No, not the IT department's fantasy world, that never-gonna-happen scenario where you create a strong, unique password for every account, memorize each one, and refresh them every few months. We both know it's not like that. The reality is that in your attempts to handle all those passwords yourself, you will commit the cardinal sin of reusing some. That is actually far more risky than using a password manager. If a single site that uses this password falls, every account that uses it is compromised.

This cache of passwords is, of course, protected by a super-password of its own—one you obviously need to choose wisely. More from Popular Mechanics Handmade whistles from England Video Player is loading.Play VideoPrevious VideoPlayNext VideoMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration 3:52Loaded: 2.59%0:00Stream Type LIVESeek to live, currently playing liveLIVERemaining Time -3:52 1xPlayback RateChaptersChaptersDescriptionsdescriptions off, selectedCaptionscaptions settings, opens captions settings dialogcaptions off, selectedEnglishAudio Trackdefault, selectedQuality1080p540p720p360p270pauto, selectedPicture-in-PictureFullscreenThis is a modal window.Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaqueFont Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall CapsReset restore all settings to the default valuesDoneClose Modal DialogEnd of dialog window. Replay "ACME Whistles | MADE HERE | Popular Mechanics" Up Next 01:29 First Look: 2020 iPhone SE 01:29 04:05 Clean your dishes in seconds 04:05 03:04 Easy Car Roof Access 03:04 Yes, this does pose a risk of its own, as you might already be screaming at your screen.

Some password managers will automatically import passwords from your browser

You already have good reason to treat the password for your Google account as if it’s a state secret. But now the stakes are higher. You’re trusting Google with the passwords that protect the rest of your life – your bank, your shopping, your travel, your private life. If someone learns or guesses your Google account password, you are completely compromised. The password has to be complex and unique. You have to treat your Google account password with the same care as a LastPass user. Perhaps more so, because it’s easier to reset a Google account password. If your passwords are saved in Chrome, you should strongly consider using two-factor authentication to log into your Google account. I’ll talk about that in the next article.

OPVault is an almost perfectly documented format. This makes it highly improbable to come across a file that will fail to be imported. If it ever happens, a bug in the plugin is probably to be blamed.

While KeeFarce is specifically designed to target KeePass password manager, it is possible that developers can create a similar tool that takes advantage of a compromised machine to target virtually every other password manager available today.

KeeFarce obtains passwords by leveraging a technique called DLL (Dynamic Link Library) injection, which allows third-party apps to tamper with the processes of another app by injecting an external DLL code.

As for the syncing: I think BitTorrent Sync should do it. It's p2p, meaning there're no servers inbetween. Maybe there're even open alternatives already. TL;DR: KeePass <-> BitTorrent Sync for database transfer <-> MiniKeePass

And most important: No proprietary encryption software can be fully trusted

If you are concerned about privacy and looking for a bullet-proof solution then the only way to go is open-source software. For example, there was another incident with a proprietary file "encrypter" for Android/iOS which used the simplest possible "encryption" on earth: XORing of data that is as easy to crack a monkey could do that. Would not happen to an open-source software. If you're worried about the mobile app not being as reliable (backdoors etc.) as the desktop app: compile it yourself from sources. https/github.com/MiniKeePass/MiniKeePass You can also compile the desktop version yourself. Honestly, I doubt most people, including you and me, will bother.

By default: no. The Auto-Type method in KeePass 2.x works the same as the one in 1.x and consequently is not keylogger-safe. However, KeePass features an alternative method called Two-Channel Auto-Type Obfuscation (TCATO), which renders keyloggers useless. This is an opt-in feature (because it doesn't work with all windows) and must be enabled for entries manually. See the TCATO documentation for details.

Seriously, the lesson I'm trying to drive home here is that the real risk posed by incidents like this is password reuse and you need to avoid that to the fullest extent possible

Having visibility to the prevalence means, for example, you might outright block every password that's appeared 100 times or more and force the user to choose another one (there are 1,858,690 of those in the data set), strongly recommend they choose a different password where it's appeared between 20 and 99 times (there's a further 9,985,150 of those), and merely flag the record if it's in the source data less than 20 times.

Password reuse is normal. It's extremely risky, but it's so common because it's easy and people aren't aware of the potential impact.

t

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected.

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected

This content is password protected.

Use a password manager like LastPass or 1Password.

BASH: Create User Accounts with Random Password

Do students recognize the importance of password-protecting their devices and having different passwords across platforms?