1Password Remigrant thread

[gregmac19]

The menubar app for 1Password is not just to facilitate working with a browser. It provides a convenient shortcut to the "Quick Access" of passwords (a small popup window). It also maintains the unlocked state of 1Password. If I'm within the timeout window, I can relaunch 1Password without have to unlocked it again. The menubar app is a light-weight version of the whole app with a much smaller memory footprint.

I've starting playing with Bitwarden; the lack of that feature is kind of painful. It's possible I'm missing something in its settings, but I've looked and don't see a way to leave something light-weight running to keep the vault unlocked and provide other functionality.

I was vaguely aware of the menubar app for 1Password. Codebook’s helper app is called Secret Agent, and those interested can find information here: https://www.zetetic.net/codebook/secretagent/

For the record, I have Codebook running right now and it is only using 72 Mb of memory.

 

[gregmac19]

I think both Firefox and Chrome offer autofill. I don't use it, but both of their settings mention it.

Several programs use the term “Autofill,” although as mentioned in the Strongbox documentation shown below, there is an “Apple Password AutoFill subsystem.” This subsystem is used in most(all?) iOS browsers and only for Safari on macOS. At a minimum, Codebook, mSecure, Minimalist, and Strongbox take advantage of this on the Mac.


Strongbox documentation: https://strongbox.reamaze.com/articles/how-to-autofill-on-macos?q=

AutoFill Passwords in Safari on Mac

With the release of MacOS Big Sur Apple now provides a fully integrated way to fill in your passwords on different sites and App, all inside that App or site. There’s no need to switch to your Password Manager and Copy/Paste. Strongbox (as of 1.14.0) now integrates with Apple’s Password AutoFill subsystem to offer suggestions and fill in passwords. This follows on from the iOS integration which has been available for a few years now and has proven very convenient. Finally it has come to Mac.

NB: Mac AutoFill support is only available with Strongbox Pro. You can try this out for free for 3 months with no obligation to buy. We hope you’ll love it.

Note that this AutoFill system on works on Apple’s latest OS (MacOS Big Sur) and only with Apps and Browsers that have upgraded to support the Password AutoFill system. So far, as of post time, the only major browser that supports AutoFill is Safari. We believe this will change over the coming months and we should see ubiquitous Password AutoFill support in most browsers and Apps in short order.


Strongbox documentation: https://strongbox.reamaze.com/kb/se...re-secure-than-using-plugins-or-the-clipboard

Is Apple’s Password AutoFill More Secure Than Using Plugins or the Clipboard?

We believe using the built in Password AutoFill subsystem is the most secure way to fill your passwords, and should become the de facto method for all browsers, apps and password managers in the future.

Of course, as with everything the devil is in the details. In principle, Apple's Password AutoFill is absolutely a better model, a system fully designed for the transmission of sensitive credentials from a Password Manager to a requesting 3rd party App/Browser. There's no globally shared data that can be sniffed, so it's a thousand times better than using clipboard. It's also doesn't require a plugin and some arbitrarily designed IPC process. Further because the browsers do the integration work, it provides a unified standard for websites to fit into, and so, eventually, no more un-fillable logins. Having a single standard is beneficial.

The only issues we can see is if the 3rd party app/browser implementation (Safari, Chrome, Firefox etc), the receiving App that is, has some kind of security issue, but then this is always the case, even with other methods. Therefore, even in the worst case scenario, we believe using the system provided Password AutoFill subsystem is at least as secure as other methods, and probably more secure. This also leaves out other non security based factors like improved UX, simplification for websites by having a common standard.

In all, we're betting on Password AutoFill on Apple platforms.

What about Chrome and Firefox on MacOS?

Unfortunately Chrome and Firefox are slow off the mark here in integrating with Apple Password AutoFill on MacOS. One of the best things we can do is pressure Chrome/Firefox... Please add your voice below!

Chrome

1170065 - chromium - An open-source project to help move the web forward. - Monorail

bugs.chromium.org

Firefox

1650212 - Integrate password autofill on macOS Big Sur

NEW (nobody) in Toolkit - Password Manager. Last updated 2024-09-18.

bugzilla.mozilla.org

May 16, 2023

 

[svenmany]

Several programs use the term “Autofill,” although as mentioned in the Strongbox documentation shown below, there is an “Apple Password AutoFill subsystem.” This subsystem is used in most(all?) iOS browsers and only for Safari on macOS. At a minimum, Codebook, mSecure, Minimalist, and Strongbox take advantage of this on the Mac.


Strongbox documentation: https://strongbox.reamaze.com/articles/how-to-autofill-on-macos?q=

AutoFill Passwords in Safari on Mac

With the release of MacOS Big Sur Apple now provides a fully integrated way to fill in your passwords on different sites and App, all inside that App or site. There’s no need to switch to your Password Manager and Copy/Paste. Strongbox (as of 1.14.0) now integrates with Apple’s Password AutoFill subsystem to offer suggestions and fill in passwords. This follows on from the iOS integration which has been available for a few years now and has proven very convenient. Finally it has come to Mac.

NB: Mac AutoFill support is only available with Strongbox Pro. You can try this out for free for 3 months with no obligation to buy. We hope you’ll love it.

Note that this AutoFill system on works on Apple’s latest OS (MacOS Big Sur) and only with Apps and Browsers that have upgraded to support the Password AutoFill system. So far, as of post time, the only major browser that supports AutoFill is Safari. We believe this will change over the coming months and we should see ubiquitous Password AutoFill support in most browsers and Apps in short order.


Strongbox documentation: https://strongbox.reamaze.com/kb/se...re-secure-than-using-plugins-or-the-clipboard

Is Apple’s Password AutoFill More Secure Than Using Plugins or the Clipboard?

We believe using the built in Password AutoFill subsystem is the most secure way to fill your passwords, and should become the de facto method for all browsers, apps and password managers in the future.

Of course, as with everything the devil is in the details. In principle, Apple's Password AutoFill is absolutely a better model, a system fully designed for the transmission of sensitive credentials from a Password Manager to a requesting 3rd party App/Browser. There's no globally shared data that can be sniffed, so it's a thousand times better than using clipboard. It's also doesn't require a plugin and some arbitrarily designed IPC process. Further because the browsers do the integration work, it provides a unified standard for websites to fit into, and so, eventually, no more un-fillable logins. Having a single standard is beneficial.

The only issues we can see is if the 3rd party app/browser implementation (Safari, Chrome, Firefox etc), the receiving App that is, has some kind of security issue, but then this is always the case, even with other methods. Therefore, even in the worst case scenario, we believe using the system provided Password AutoFill subsystem is at least as secure as other methods, and probably more secure. This also leaves out other non security based factors like improved UX, simplification for websites by having a common standard.

In all, we're betting on Password AutoFill on Apple platforms.

What about Chrome and Firefox on MacOS?

Unfortunately Chrome and Firefox are slow off the mark here in integrating with Apple Password AutoFill on MacOS. One of the best things we can do is pressure Chrome/Firefox... Please add your voice below!

Chrome

1170065 - chromium - An open-source project to help move the web forward. - Monorail

bugs.chromium.org

Firefox

1650212 - Integrate password autofill on macOS Big Sur

NEW (nobody) in Toolkit - Password Manager. Last updated 2024-09-18.

bugzilla.mozilla.org

May 16, 2023

Thanks. That's interesting.

The 1Password extension is pretty unreliable for me. It could be that integration with this subsystem would improve it.

I looked at the Minimalist website to see a screenshot of what the autofill looks like. I looks pretty restricted (I guess it's just what you see if you're using Keychain) and I wonder what features are available to allow the more extensive functionality available in the 1Password plugin. I can review a lot of information, switch vaults, etc. As bad as the plugin is, I'd hate to lose lots of functionality.

 

[koelsh]

What has people's experience been with 1Password 8's "search" function?

Since 1PW8 it has acted as a "quick jump" instead of a true search which can be described as a "filter" showing just the relevant results.

 

[svenmany]

What has people's experience been with 1Password 8's "search" function?

Since 1PW8 it has acted as a "quick jump" instead of a true search which can be described as a "filter" showing just the relevant results.

I find it to be quite excellent. When you search for stuff, the dropdown shows the matches. You then have a choice of typing enter or command-enter. Enter jumps to the selection within the full vault. Command-enter opens a filtered list. I think that's what you mean by "quick jump" and "true search", respectively.

 

[koelsh]

I find it to be quite excellent. When you search for stuff, the dropdown shows the matches. You then have a choice of typing enter or command-enter. Enter jumps to the selection within the full vault. Command-enter opens a filtered list. I think that's what you mean by "quick jump" and "true search", respectively.

Yup which is completely counter to how all other search systems work.

• When searching in this forum type something in a press enter, boom filtered list.
• Type something into Google and press enter, boom, filtered list.
• Apple mail, type something in to search and press enter and boom, filtered list.
• 1Password versions 1 through 7 type something and press enter and boom, filtered list

There's a couple dozen different search boxes I work with on a regular basis and every singe one of them returns a filtered list of all results when pressing enter. Except for 1Password 8 where pressing enter instead jumps to the selected item. To get the expect behavior in this one system I have to press extra buttons; command+enter or command+alt+f to "find" the item.

 

[Mr. Heckles]

Yes, for now,, but I wary its a sign of worse things in the future like how they transitioned in a subscription + license option to license only option. Its optional at first , and then?? we have to wait and see.

I found this interesting:

Bitwarden only uses Google Analytics on its website, not on the apps. So, this is not a huge concern, in my opinion. The same goes for 1Password, which also uses Google Analytics on its website. However, 1Password has also recently stated that they will soon start using telemetry on their apps, which is another thing to consider. But if we are talking about website analytics, it is actually next to impossible to find a product that wouldn’t use them. For example, KeePassXC uses cloudflareinsights, and Strongbox uses plausible but also tries to access Canvas. So, there really isn’t a perfect solution in this regard. But then you could also ask how many people have to even revisit these websites in the first place after creating their account or downloading the app. I would assume not many times, if at all.

Found in this thread from Privacy Guides Discussion site. They all basically use something.

 

[svenmany]

Many open source products I use have analytics, which I often leave on to help the developers.

 

[svenmany]

Yup which is completely counter to how all other search systems work.

• When searching in this forum type something in a press enter, boom filtered list.
• Type something into Google and press enter, boom, filtered list.
• Apple mail, type something in to search and press enter and boom, filtered list.
• 1Password versions 1 through 7 type something and press enter and boom, filtered list

There's a couple dozen different search boxes I work with on a regular basis and every singe one of them returns a filtered list of all results when pressing enter. Except for 1Password 8 where pressing enter instead jumps to the selected item. To get the expect behavior in this one system I have to press extra buttons; command+enter or command+alt+f to "find" the item.

I'll admit that I was originally thrown by their approach since it differed from 1Password 7.

They have followed a different pattern. It's kind of like searching in a document, if you consider the list of passwords to be a document; searching just jumps to the selected match.

They made the design choice I would have made. When you are searching, you immediately see the collection of matches, before pressing any key. I would not get any value of having the enter key set a restriction in the list; I would always just clear it, since I've already selected the item of interest from the dropdown. They've made it clear at the bottom of the dropdown that command-enter will restrict the list.

The examples you gave probably don't have a dropdown right below the search field providing a preview of matches from which to make a selection. Therefore, they have to provide the matches after pressing enter.

 

[koelsh]

I'll admit that I was originally thrown by their approach since it differed from 1Password 7.

They have followed a different pattern. It's kind of like searching in a document, if you consider the list of passwords to be a document; searching just jumps to the selected match.

They made the design choice I would have made. When you are searching, you immediately see the collection of matches, before pressing any key. I would not get any value of having the enter key set a restriction in the list; I would always just clear it, since I've already selected the item of interest from the dropdown. They've made it clear at the bottom of the dropdown that command-enter will restrict the list.

The examples you gave probably don't have a dropdown right below the search field providing a preview of matches from which to make a selection. Therefore, they have to provide the matches after pressing enter.

I can see where it would make sense if the passwords were in a document however 1Password has always been a database. 1Password is closer to an email client than a Word document.

It also makes sense for people who never have more than 5 items for a given site or search term but that seems like a unusual situation. I have 1700+ items across personal and business meaning many search terms are going to return a dozen or more items and it's disappointingly uncommon for the item I'm actually needing to be in the dropdown.

And sure there is a clearly labeled item at the bottom of the dropdown and a new keyboard shortcut to get that filtered list however it means extra mousing and and extra button presses that were not required before and are not required in other systems. For instance search in Passwords in System Settings returns a filtered list without having to press anything.

 

[svenmany]

I can see where it would make sense if the passwords were in a document however 1Password has always been a database. 1Password is closer to an email client than a Word document.

It also makes sense for people who never have more than 5 items for a given site or search term but that seems like a unusual situation. I have 1700+ items across personal and business meaning many search terms are going to return a dozen or more items and it's disappointingly uncommon for the item I'm actually needing to be in the dropdown.

And sure there is a clearly labeled item at the bottom of the dropdown and a new keyboard shortcut to get that filtered list however it means extra mousing and and extra button presses that were not required before and are not required in other systems. For instance search in Passwords in System Settings returns a filtered list without having to press anything.

You didn't start this subtopic with your complaints; you asked others for their opinions. You definitely want to argue me out of mine.

I like what they've done. Your intuition doesn't match mine. I have 900 items in my database and don't struggle like you do. Raise on their forums and they'll probably explain their reasoning. They might add an option to switch enter / command-enter for people who find pressing the command key a problem.

 

[koelsh]

You didn't start this subtopic with your complaints; you asked others for their opinions. You definitely want to argue me out of mine.

I like what they've done. Your intuition doesn't match mine. I have 900 items in my database and don't struggle like you do. Raise on their forums and they'll probably explain their reasoning. They might add an option to switch enter / command-enter for people who find pressing the command key a problem.

My apologies, was not intending to come off argumentative and am not trying to argue you out of your opinion but to engage in conversation. It's just really disappointing when a single application treats a common function so differently.

 

[svenmany]

My apologies, was not intending to come off argumentative and am not trying to argue you out of your opinion but to engage in conversation. It's just really disappointing when a single application treats a common function so differently.

Thanks for that apology and getting me reoriented.

I started wondering why I don't have an issue with their approach. Some common searches I do get 8 matches or so. But, I rarely get more than that, often less. Maybe I'm naming things and searching for them in a way that facilitates that. I always add qualifications at the end. So I have entries like

BoboBank person1
BoboBank person2
BoboBank person3

When I'm searching for person1's login to BoboBank, I type "BoboBank" and the three choices come up. If I type "person1", I would find many entries that were made for person1 and it would be necessary for me to hit command enter to work with the result.

I also use the collections, so I'm almost never working with all vaults when searching. In my case that means I don't consider the vaults of my family members.

I've found 1Password support to be receptive to ideas. There's a chance your perspective has been shared with them before and it might help adding your voice on their forums. They could easily add a toggle in preferences to make enter behave as you want. They push out changes and improvements faster than any other software company I know.

 

[koelsh]

Thanks for that apology and getting me reoriented.

I started wondering why I don't have an issue with their approach. Some common searches I do get 8 matches or so. But, I rarely get more than that, often less. Maybe I'm naming things and searching for them in a way that facilitates that. I always add qualifications at the end. So I have entries like

BoboBank person1
BoboBank person2
BoboBank person3

When I'm searching for person1's login to BoboBank, I type "BoboBank" and the three choices come up. If I type "person1", I would find many entries that were made for person1 and it would be necessary for me to hit command enter to work with the result.

I also use the collections, so I'm almost never working with all vaults when searching. In my case that means I don't consider the vaults of my family members.

I've found 1Password support to be receptive to ideas. There's a chance your perspective has been shared with them before and it might help adding your voice on their forums. They could easily add a toggle in preferences to make enter behave as you want. They push out changes and improvements faster than any other software company I know.

Thanks! I've found their support to be receptive to this situation and they say they can provide a solution but nothing has changed from 1P8's initial release and the last company response I've found on the topic was in November 2022.

I was looking at why this is causing problems for me and it's organized like your example. I have a couple dozen accounts of "Email User@name" and "Service1 User@name" and "Service2 User@name". That way a search for Service1 would return all logins for that service or User@name would return all the logins for that user. It’s usually overflowing the quick search dropdown and I generally want to see and work on them as a group instead of individually.

Playing with it today I realized a quirk... any time I press enter on a search whether it's to jump or show all matching items it clears the field which means I have to retype it if I need to rerun or modify the search string. There's a quasi solution with "Find" by pressing option+cmd+F which filters and lets the search string be modified but it only does titles and not content.

Ironically (maybe) the iPad version of 1Password is the exact opposite. The search field acts as a filter and keeps the search term even when pressing enter.

 

[svenmany]

Thanks! I've found their support to be receptive to this situation and they say they can provide a solution but nothing has changed from 1P8's initial release and the last company response I've found on the topic was in November 2022.

I was looking at why this is causing problems for me and it's organized like your example. I have a couple dozen accounts of "Email User@name" and "Service1 User@name" and "Service2 User@name". That way a search for Service1 would return all logins for that service or User@name would return all the logins for that user. It’s usually overflowing the quick search dropdown and I generally want to see and work on them as a group instead of individually.

Playing with it today I realized a quirk... any time I press enter on a search whether it's to jump or show all matching items it clears the field which means I have to retype it if I need to rerun or modify the search string. There's a quasi solution with "Find" by pressing option+cmd+F which filters and lets the search string be modified but it only does titles and not content.

Ironically (maybe) the iPad version of 1Password is the exact opposite. The search field acts as a filter and keeps the search term even when pressing enter.

Today, trying to work as you might, I used command enter to get a filtered list. My plan was to alter one of the items found. Once I made the edit and saved it, I could not clear the filter on the list. The same bug occurs when I just cancel the edit.

Then, since you mentioned option+cmd+F, I tried that. It turns out option+cmd+F will no longer return focus to that find field if a search term is already present.

I'm going to report this stuff to them. It really seems to be a mess. I just never noticed the mess, since I always hit enter on the search field.

I should go back to my earlier post and erase "I find it to be quite excellent."

 

[koelsh]

Today, trying to work as you might, I used command enter to get a filtered list. My plan was to alter one of the items found. Once I made the edit and saved it, I could not clear the filter on the list. The same bug occurs when I just cancel the edit.

Then, since you mentioned option+cmd+F, I tried that. It turns out option+cmd+F will no longer return focus to that find field if a search term is already present.

I'm going to report this stuff to them. It really seems to be a mess. I just never noticed the mess, since I always hit enter on the search field.

I should go back to my earlier post and erase "I find it to be quite excellent."

Wow surprised to hear that! I haven’t encountered that behavior.

It does seem like option+cmd+f only works if an item in the list is currently in focus.

 

[maflynn]

Interesting video on Password Managers. I queued up the video to skip the intro, feel free to back track to the introductory comments but I figured most of you don't need to learn the value of password managers.

Obviously lastpass is highly recommended that you AVOID it, and Bitwarden and 1Password are recommended. I'm also surprised that 1PW doesn't including trackers like many others do. I'm still a fan of BW, but I've not gotten off the snide to re-test it and re-compare it against 1PW

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Interesting video on Password Managers. I queued up the video to skip the intro, feel free to back track to the introductory comments but I figured most of you don't need to learn the value of password managers.

Obviously lastpass is highly recommended that you AVOID it, and Bitwarden and 1Password are recommended. I'm also surprised that 1PW doesn't including trackers like many others do. I'm still a fan of BW, but I've not gotten off the snide to re-test it and re-compare it against 1PW

I’ll have to watch this, looks interesting.

 

[MacBH928]

not one bit. It’s the one subscription I don’t mind paying at all.

Also. I take it you use Apple Products since you’re on this site…. That’s proprietary software.

Yes. I am actually not against proprietary software, my problem is when it comes to privacy and controlling the market.
If the software does not breach my privacy I have no problem with it. Also I do not want it to control the market, we do not want another IE6 situation or the dreaded "You have to use MS Office because thats what everyone else is using otherwise all document formatting will be messed up".

Why do you say that? Bitwarden's desktop app is limited compared to 1Password's. Is that why you say that?

I think you understood me wrong. I am not saying Bitwarden app is superior to 1password. I am saying its more of an extension for browsers, their app is crippled. 1password is the superior app.

 

[MacBH928]

You bring this up over and over and over again! How often do you think it is necessary? I have explained this before, but I’ll do it one last time.

Password AutoFill is an Apple feature that other browser providers have not yet chosen to incorporate into their software. So what is true for Codebook regarding AutoFill is true for other password managers as well. As you know, many password managers come with plug-ins that supply an autofilling feature. Codebook however provides (as you mentioned) an assistant app that, although not as convenient as AutoFill, works well.

I bring it back up for people who do not want to read 6-7 pages of thread. I do not care if FF or Chrome does not implement Password Autofill. I believe majority of internet users do not use Safari on Desktop. People are not switching browsers just to use Codebook. Its their decision , and we get to decide for our own.

They say its most secure but no one is complaining about Bitwarden or 1pw security with them having an extension, an extension that works in FF and Chrome/Brave.

I did it over a year ago, but the import of my 1PW data into BW went generally well, but there were some parts that were a mess. One cool thing about 1PW is that I could have different categories such as WiFi Router passwords and there was no direct correlation in my BW vault for that so I had to clean up things like that.

One thing that upset me during exporting my 1PW data is that I realized it had stored some very sensitive data (SSN, phone numbers, etc) from when I signed up for websites. I didn't realize it had done this because it wasn't displaying it.

I believe this is due to a neat thing in 1PW. 1PW has your license registered in the app. If you unlock it with your password it auto registers the app and does not ask for a serial. Something like that IIRC.

The menubar app for 1Password is not just to facilitate working with a browser. It provides a convenient shortcut to the "Quick Access" of passwords (a small popup window). It also maintains the unlocked state of 1Password. If I'm within the timeout window, I can relaunch 1Password without have to unlocked it again. The menubar app is a light-weight version of the whole app with a much smaller memory footprint.

I've starting playing with Bitwarden; the lack of that feature is kind of painful. It's possible I'm missing something in its settings, but I've looked and don't see a way to leave something light-weight running to keep the vault unlocked and provide other functionality.

yup, no assistant app for Bitwarden and I do not believe it will ever come. Bitwarden is so concentrated on a cloud solution not native apps. I may be wrong but the only password managers with assistant apps are 1PW, Enpass, and Codebook. Its a must feature for me.

 

[maflynn]

my problem is when it comes to privacy and controlling the market. If the software does not breach my privacy I have no problem with it.

Why leave 1Password then? I don't think they've breached anyone's privacy.

Also I do not want it to control the market, we do not want another IE6 situation or the dreaded "You have to use MS Office because thats what everyone else is using otherwise all document formatting will be messed up".

AFAIK, the current market leader is LastPass, which of course boggles the mind, after that there's a number of heavy hitters, so I don't think that sort of issue will arise in this sector - at least not any time soon

 

[MisterSavage]

I believe this is due to a neat thing in 1PW. 1PW has your license registered in the app. If you unlock it with your password it auto registers the app and does not ask for a serial. Something like that IIRC.

No, this was completely different data. It was things captured during initial signup such as last four of your social and other data I wouldn't want saved.

 

[svenmany]

I think you understood me wrong. I am not saying Bitwarden app is superior to 1password. I am saying its more of an extension for browsers, their app is crippled. 1password is the superior app.

That's exactly what I understood you to be saying. And I agree that the Bitwarden desktop app is lacking.

 

[gregmac19]

I bring it back up for people who do not want to read 6-7 pages of thread. I do not care if FF or Chrome does not implement Password Autofill. I believe majority of internet users do not use Safari on Desktop. People are not switching browsers just to use Codebook. Its their decision , and we get to decide for our own.

Codebook’s documentation prominently shows and clearly explains how AutoFill is handled in their program. Sensible users will review the documentation of any program prior to using it. Thus, I don’t see any compelling reason, and find it tiresome, that you regularly bring this information up.

Most people use Chrome, but a significant number run Safari: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/02/safari-overtakes-edge-popular-browsers/

 

[MacBH928]

Why leave 1Password then? I don't think they've breached anyone's privacy.

AFAIK, the current market leader is LastPass, which of course boggles the mind, after that there's a number of heavy hitters, so I don't think that sort of issue will arise in this sector - at least not any time soon

1- I am not saying the breached the privacy. I am saying I just do not trust them in the first place. I do not trust proprietary software with personal information. Exact reason why I do not backup my HDD to Gdrive, OneDrive, or Dropbox.

2-You are correct about this specific market sector but I am speaking out of philosophy in general. I hate it when there is only 1 or 2 companies that control the market. Competition and new alternatives are good.

Codebook’s documentation prominently shows and clearly explains how AutoFill is handled in their program. Sensible users will review the documentation of any program prior to using it. Thus, I don’t see any compelling reason, and find it tiresome, that you regularly bring this information up.

Most people use Chrome, but a significant number run Safari: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/05/02/safari-overtakes-edge-popular-browsers/

Do you think most people who use iphones, Android phones, and MS Office read the documentation of this software?
You are free to do so , but most people just want to get on their lives. I bet most people do not even read their car manual.

In the article you show that 10% of people use Safari, in other words, Codebook is not the right solution for 90% of desktop users. Hence why I say, its a deal breaker for 90% of desktop users. If it best suits any one, by all means use it but I can not generally recommend it as other password managers have superior capabilities.