September 12, 2016 at 22:25 #4083
After some days using AxCrypt 2, I give up and I’m returning to the “old” version 1.7.3180.
Many thanks for the job with the version 2, but I prefer the simplicity of the version 1. The version 1 works perfect, it’s easy, simple and really convenient.
The question is: Is it safe to use the version 1.7.3180?
Now, with the development discontinued, I don’t know if I can continue using that version without security problems.
Thanks again for your job with AxCrypt!!
Cheers.September 13, 2016 at 08:23 #4084
I’m really sorry to hear that you do not find version 2 to be easier and simpler to use – which is the intent! In order to drive development in the right direction, I’d really appreciate specific comments on what you find to be less attractive with version 2. We’re continually adapting and fine tuning AxCrypt to fit as many usage scenarios as possible within our overall design and security goals.
No, as to your question: AxCrypt 1.7.3180 is as safe to use as it always was. However, it’s not being actively developed and while we are not aware of any issues with it, it’s unlikely we’d fix them should such arise. In the long run it’s also likely it’ll become incompatible with future versions of Windows. But it does appear to work well with Windows 10, so for now you should be fine.
We’ve made some changes to how AxCrypt is used, most of which actually make it more convenient to use both for daily personal use, as well as for sharing encrypted files with other recipients. We’ve also removed some usage patterns that are simply not good. Before making the final judgement, please look into the following blog posts:September 13, 2016 at 12:35 #4085
Thanks for your quick response and, again, thanks for your interest and your job with AxCrypt.
Well, in my opinion, version 1 it’s more convenient, no options, no log-in, no password asked before encrypts. I don’t like to have the same password to sign in on the web and to encrypt my files. I think it’s just I’m used to version 1 but I’m not comfortable with AxCrypt 2.
Thanks Svante.September 13, 2016 at 13:53 #4086
Ok, thanks for your input.
I wont’ be changing your mind I guess, but for what it’s worth:
– There are no options really with v1 or v2, as far as I know. Of course, there are more functions with v2, that’s true.
– The sign in is really no difference in usage – type your password and hit ‘OK’. You can run offline if you wish.
– Not sure what you mean about ‘no password asked before encrypts’. V2 does not ask for a password to encrypt. V1 may, or may not, depending on your choice.
Anyway, thanks again, and good luck.October 18, 2016 at 19:30 #4463
I have 3 different peoples information on my computer. I have access to all 3. However, each individual only has access to their information. Therefore, 3 passwords.October 19, 2016 at 16:25 #4466
It sounds like a perfect scenario for AxCrypt 2 key sharing, if I understand it correctly.
Here’s what I think:
You’re “Dave”. You share encrypted documents with “Alice”, “Bob” and “Charlie”.
You have (at least) 4 passwords to keep track of with AxCrypt 1, and “Alice”, “Bob” and “Charlie” has one, or possibly at least 2 if they also use AxCrypt for private data that for example you “Dave” should not have access to.
That’s pretty complicated.
With AxCrypt 2, you instead share the keys to the file with for example “email@example.com”, “firstname.lastname@example.org” and “email@example.com”. You’re “firstname.lastname@example.org”.
You use one password to sign in to your “email@example.com” AxCrypt ID. When you open any file, regardelss of if they are shared with Alice, Bob or Charlie, it opens wihtout further ado using your sign in password.
When you send or share the actual shared file with Alice, Bob or Charlie, they sign in to their AxCrypt ID with their own passwords, which you do not know.
Now, everyone can access exactly what they should – you can access all files in this group, while Alice, Bob and Charlie can only access their own files and the ones you have shared the keys with.
Therefor, 1 password is enough. Per person.